Fr. Kramer: Bergoglio the Infidel!
From Facebook 8-14-16
The FACT that Benedict remains in office as the only valid pope is
underscored and confirmed by the FACT that Jorge Bergoglio has been
proven by his own words to have defected from the Catholic Church, and
is in reality a non-Christian infidel.
Bergoglio does not believe in the God of Christianity. He has declared, "There is no Catholic God." That God, for Bergoglio "does not exist." The transcendent God of Christianity is according to Bergoglio, a "God spray" -- "This God spray does not exist." His "god" is the Gnostic deity of the Ancient Mysteries -- "Mother Earth", the mother goddess who Bergoglio said (2 June) "It is she who gave us life and protects us." He spoke these words of overt apostasy in his meeting with the Jains, a pagan sect which denies the existence of the transcendent God.
Bergoglio does not believe in the God of Christianity. He has declared, "There is no Catholic God." That God, for Bergoglio "does not exist." The transcendent God of Christianity is according to Bergoglio, a "God spray" -- "This God spray does not exist." His "god" is the Gnostic deity of the Ancient Mysteries -- "Mother Earth", the mother goddess who Bergoglio said (2 June) "It is she who gave us life and protects us." He spoke these words of overt apostasy in his meeting with the Jains, a pagan sect which denies the existence of the transcendent God.
In Bergoglio, there is the patent malice of unbelief -- he preferrs
the Hermetic Mysteries of Freemasonic Gnosticism to the divinely
revealed Sacred Mysteries of Catholic dogma.
Luke:22:31-32 - That
grace is with Benedict, the valid successor of Simon-Peter; it is not
with the faithless pagan Bergoglio. Bergoglio's "faith" cannot fail,
because he has no faith at all to begin with -- he can't lose what he
doesn't have. Jorge Bergoglio is a sectary of the Ancient Mysteries --
the solar cult of the ancient Gentiles preserved and perpetuated under
the "Judaic" mask of modern Caballistic Freemasonry. Bergoglio's "faith"
is not in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but in the Gnosis of the Lodge.
Francis does not possess the faculty to speak ex cathedra, because that
is a charism which resides exclusively with the Roman Pontiff alone --
not with an "active member" of the papal ministry which is shared with
the "passive member" who "stepped aside" to "make room" for an associate
in a shared petrine munus -- which is invalid because it is clearly
against the divine constitution of the Church. Benedict XVI's Declaratio
of renunciation suffers from a fatal and deliberate equivocation which renders it null & void due to defect of intention.
Since Benedict explicitly refused to fully relinquish the papal munus, it remains fully with him: the active portion of the munus cannot be renounced and parcelled out to a "successor" to wield the power of governance, while the "Pope Emeritus" retains the passive exercise of the official munus. Already in 1610 the question of the charism of office was settled by Domenico Gravina OP, whose sententia that the charism of the office can only reside in one induvidual at a time was universally unchallanged, and finally confirmed by the First Vatican Council which specified the singularity of the individual who is the Roman Pontiff who possesses the charism of the Primacy and Infallibility. Thus, Benedict XVI's attempt to divide the munus in two is patently invalid -- and was thinly camoflaged with fatal equivocation which itself renders the decree null & void.
Since Benedict explicitly refused to fully relinquish the papal munus, it remains fully with him: the active portion of the munus cannot be renounced and parcelled out to a "successor" to wield the power of governance, while the "Pope Emeritus" retains the passive exercise of the official munus. Already in 1610 the question of the charism of office was settled by Domenico Gravina OP, whose sententia that the charism of the office can only reside in one induvidual at a time was universally unchallanged, and finally confirmed by the First Vatican Council which specified the singularity of the individual who is the Roman Pontiff who possesses the charism of the Primacy and Infallibility. Thus, Benedict XVI's attempt to divide the munus in two is patently invalid -- and was thinly camoflaged with fatal equivocation which itself renders the decree null & void.
In the context of the Gnostic Creed, one perfectly understands the logical consistency of all the errant, and seemingly contradictory outbursts of the man who calls himself "Francis".
Jorge's "devotion" to 'Mary' as the "Catholic" representation of the "Eternal Feminine" can be properly understood in its Gnostic context as entirely consistent theologically with his radical Naturalism, which denies the involvement of the intervention of any transcendent supernatural power in the workings of the material universe. The immanent vital principle of the universe, "Mother Earth", the Gnostic goddess who is the deification of the "Eternal Feminine", is attributed as the apparent basis, the sufficient reason to account for the existence of life and motion in a material world which is capable on its own of only transient motion without the vital life giving principle of immanence.
In this pagan context, which is systemstically elaborated in the philosophy of Spinoza and Hegel; and expressed in the speculative mysticism of Teilhard de Chardin, one can gain the proper understanding of Bergoglio's theology, in all its systematic consistency -- every piece of his intellectual jigsaw fits perfectly into place: That's why he can express devotion to Our Lady of Fatima on the one hand, and profess his Gnostic belief in "Mother Earth", as he did this last 2 June to his pagan Jains visitors in the Vatican.
Many wonder how can such a radical Modernist like Jorge have such devotion to Padre Pio, who was so traditional and strictly orthodox; but like the identification of Mary with the Eternal Feminine, Padre Pio is used by Gnostics as a symbol representing Gnosis -- the mystical knowledge from the tree of life.
Bergoglio's radically heretical profession of the annihilation of the souls of the damned, is also a Gnostic doctrine, which flatly denies the Catholic dogma of the eternal punishment of hell fire of the reprobate souls.
Jorge's profession of the matrimonial validity of cohabitating couples is also stands in direct opposition of the Catholic doctrine of the supernatural sacramentality of Christian marriage -- Naturalism.
Jorge's denial of the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves, professing it to be merely an act of sharing the bread at hand, underscores the radical Naturalism of his Gnostic-Freemasonic belief system, which utterly opposes the doctrine of supernatural grace and the supernatural omnipotence of the transcendent God.
"Freemasonry is implacably opposed to the transcendent God." - Fr. Denis Fahey C.S.Sp., D.D., D.Ph.
Although the influence of Spinozism can be seen also in the writings of Joseph Ratzinger, which have resulted in his own serious doctrinal errors, Ratzinger has not radically denied the Christisn notion of God, and the necessity of faith, as Bergoglio has done. Like Bergoglio, Pope Benedict has also praised the Spinozan Jesuit Teilhard; but he, nevertheless, has not openly denied the supernatural basis of religion which is faith, and opposed the transcendent nature of God as Bergoglio has done, in his unholy pursuit to replace the Catholic faith and the Gospel of Christ with the Gnostic Creed of Freemasonry.
Jorge Bergoglio, on the other hand, is a manifest public heretic who has openly denied divine truths which pertain to natural law, and are written in the heart of man by God. (Rom.2:14) Hence, his denial of these divine truths cannot be made as the innocent errors of ignorance, but such direct and explicit denial is an infallible proof of formal heresy of those whom St. Paul says will be "judged without the law". (Rom. 2:14)
JORGE BERGOGLIO'S RELIGION --FREEMASONRY (NATURALISM, RATIONALISM, DEISM)
Those who doubt that "Pope" Francis is the destroyer foretold in the prophecy attributed to St. Francis of Assisi, need only read the article below to understand that Bergoglio is a sworn enemy of Catholicism who deliberately demolishes the Church. Bergoglio is more radical in his revolt that Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Melanchton, Knox and Cranmer all together. Jorge Bergoglio is the Public Enemy No. 1 of the Catholic religion.
Bergoglio teaches that even those without faith, which is to say, infidels, can be saved -- and that there is no need to obey God's commandments. Obedience to one's own faithless conscience suffices for salvation, according to Bergoglio. Divine Revelation teaches there is no justification or salvation without faith, and that the divine commandments must be obeyed: "Tu mandásti mandáta tua custodíri nimis"; and, "maledicti qui declinant a mandatis tuis" (Ps. 118); " Convertántur peccatóres in inférnum, omnes Gentes quæ obliviscúntur Deum" (Ps. 9), and, "sic viae omnium qui obliviscuntur Deum et spes hypocritae peribit" (Iob. 8:13).
The dogmatic teaching of the Council of Trent, the explicit teaching of Scripture, and the universal and perpetual magisterium all teach the diametrical opposite:
"When we say that faith is necessary for the remission of sins, we mean to speak of the Catholic faith, not heretical faith. Without the habit of this faith, no man is justified." (St. Alphonsus Liguori, An Exposition and Defense of All the Points of Faith Discussed and Defined by the Council of Trent)
As I have said many times: Jorge Bergoglio is a perfidious and godless infidel. The persecution he has unleashed on the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate is patently the work of an enemy of the Church:
http://www.maurizioblondet.it/involontaria-ammissione-di-e…/
MAKE NO MISTAKE -- BERGOGLIO IS A FAITHLESS APOSTATE
At the end of the synod, Bergoglio declared in yet another interview with Eugenio Scalfari:
"This is the bottom line result, the de facto appraisals are entrusted to the confessors, but at the end of faster or slower paths, all the divorced who ask will be admitted.”
These are the words of Fr. Bergoglio: "ALL THE DIVORCED WHO ASK [for Holy Communion] WILL BE ADMITTED." (http://fatima.org/perspectives/sd/perspective798.asp)
What utter contempt for God's law. Bergoglio does not believe in Christ's doctrine on marriage -- Jorge Bergoglio is an infidel -- a faithless heathen who openly denies the most basic dogmas and moral teachings of the Church. He is not a member of the Catholic Church, nor its pope.
"First of all, you ask if the God of the Christians forgives those who do not believe and do not seek faith.
Given that—and this is fundamental—God's mercy has no limits . . . the issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their own conscience. Sin, even for those who have no faith, exists when people disobey their conscience."
The key words are: "those who do not believe and do not seek faith." Does God forgive them? Bergoglio says, "God's mercy has no limits . . . the issue for those who do not believe in God is obeying their own conscience" (!!!) and:
"The goodness or the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision"
Note also the moral relativism: "listening and obeying it [conscience], means deciding about what is perceived to be good or evil"
Bergoglio states with unmistakable clarity that one with no faith at all obtains forgiveness from God by obeying his conscience: "deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil."
For Bergoglio, the conscience is autonomous: the "Thou shalt" and "Thou shalt not" commandments are nullified -- human dignity (according to Bergoglio's Masonic creed) demands that the human person decide for himself what is right or wrong, without the tyranny of "clericalism" dictating to man's conscience, "Thou shalt not!"
Bergoglio's economy of salvation dispenses entirely with any need for faith -- faith is utterly superfluous. Salvation depends exclusively on following one's own autonomous conscience; and absolutely no one may dictate to that conscience by claiming to teach in God's name with divine authotity.
This is Bergoglio's religion. It is as far removed from Christianity as heaven is from hell. Bergoglio's religion is not Catholicism -- it is Masonism in its purest form. His creed is essentially identical to that of the godless Enlightenment freethinker, Lord Shaftesbury (1671 - 1713): " The articles of Shaftesbury's religious creed were few and simple, but these he entertained with a conviction amounting to enthusiasm. They may briefly be summed up as a belief in one God whose most characteristic attribute is universal benevolence, in the moral government of the universe, and in a future state of man making up for the imperfections and repairing the inequalities of the present life." AH! The Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man. (cf. Wikipedia)
Shaftesbury's moral doctrine is that of the "Moral Sense", of which the two most basic principles are:
"1 that the distinction between right and wrong is part of the constitution of human nature; 2. that morality stands apart from theology, and the moral qualities of actions are determined apart from the arbitrary will of God."
Fr. Cornelio Fabro cites the verbatim quotation (Introduzione all"ateismo moderno; English title, God in Exile. Modern Atheism) in which Shaftesbury declares that religion does not consist in believing tenets of revelation, but in morality. His religion was essentially Deism and Rationalism.
(cf.- http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/shaftesbury/#8)
Lest anyone think Scalfari fabricated the above Beegoglio quotation, here's a a parallel passage in Bergoglio's sermon:
Francesco, il capo della Chiesa Cattolica Romana ha affermato che anche gli atei vanno in paradiso. Pochi giorni fa infatti, ha raccontato la storia di un parrocchiano Cattolico che chiese ad un prete se anche gli atei erano stati salvati da Gesù, ed ha detto:
‘Il Signore ci ha creati a Sua immagine e somiglianza, e noi siamo l’immagine del Signore, ed Egli fa del bene e tutti noi abbiamo questo comandamento nel cuore: fai il bene e non fare il male. Tutti noi. ‘Ma, Padre, questo non è Cattolico! Non può fare il bene’. Sì, può farlo …. ‘Il Signore ha redento tutti noi, tutti noi, con il Sangue di Cristo: tutti noi, non solo Cattolici. Tutti! ‘Padre, e gli atei?’ Anche gli atei. Tutti!’ …. Dobbiamo incontrarci facendo il bene. ‘Ma, Padre, io non credo, sono un ateo!’ Ma fai il bene: noi ci incontreremo là’ [in paradiso].
Ecco le parole in inglese così come sono state pubblicate dall’Huffington Post:
“The Lord created us in His image and likeness, and we are the image of the Lord, and He does good and all of us have this commandment at heart: do good and do not do evil. All of us. ‘But, Father, this is not Catholic! He cannot do good.’ Yes, he can… “The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone!”.. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”
http://giacintobutindaro.org/…/secondo-papa-francesco-anch…/
Bergoglio in, Heaven and Earth:
"As I am a believer, I know that these riches are a gift from God. I also know that the other person, the atheist, does not know that. I do not approach the relationship in order to proselytize, or convert the atheist; I respect him and I show myself as I am. Where there is knowledge, there begins to appear esteem, affection, and friendship. I do not have any type of reluctance, nor would I say that his life is condemned, because I am convinced that I do not have the right to make a judgment about the honesty of that person; even less, if he shows me those human virtues that exalt others and do me good."
Jorge "Francis" Bergoglio is most cerrainly an infidel, without the slightest doubt:
I can say with absolute certitude that Bergoglio is a formal heretic on the basis of the considerations that it is impossible that he is inculpable for denying the most basic revealed truth of the necessity of faith for salvation, because that pertains to the Natural Law which is written in the heart (Rom. 2:15): "Certum est hominem teneri ex lege naturali ad Deum per Fidem, Spem et Charitatem se convertere, et ideo elicere earum virtutum actus" (Opera Moralia, Lib. II, Tract. I, De Præcepto Fidei. cap. II) - and therefore there is besides the patent matter of heresy the inexcusable form of the sin of heresy, which puts Jorge Bergoglio outside of communion with the Catholic Church: “Hæresis est error intellectus, et pertinax contra Fidem, in eo qui Fidem sucepit. ... Unde patet, ad Hæresim, ut et Apostasiam, duo requiri, 1. Judicium erroneum, quod est ejus quasi materiale. 2. Pertinaciam; quae est quasi formale. Porro pertinaciter errare non est hic acriter, et mordicus suum errorem tueri; sed est eum retinere, postquam contrarium est sufficienter propositum: sive quando scit contrarium teneri a reliqua universali Christi in terris Ecclesia, cui suum iudicium præferat” – St. Alphonsus M. De Liguori, Lib. II. Tract. I. De præcepto Fidei. Dubium III.
Since this matter pertains to the Natural Law, it is patent and certain that both of the conditions for matter and form are present in Bergoglio's denial of the most fundamental principle upon which all religion is based and hinges on, since in matters of natural law, "whoever shall have sinned without the law shall perish without the law". (Rom. 2:12).
JORGE BERGOGLIO IS THE SPEARHEAD OF THE GREAT APOSTASY
As Cardinal Ciappi wrote on the Third Secret of Fatima, "[T]he great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top." The collect for the XVIIth Sunday After Pentecost implores God to protect His faithful from the diabolical poison (the false opinions being spewed daily by Jorge Bergoglio and his Mason occupied Vatican), so they may avoid this contagion and follow the divine truths perpetually taught by the Catholic Church with a pure mind:
Orémus
Da, quaesumus, Domine, populo tuo diabolica vitare contagia: et te solum Deum pura mente sectari.
Per Dóminum . . .
Bergoglio's deadly poison, is faithlessness, which produces the death of the soul. The first Great Commandment is this: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind." (Mt.22:37) This commandment unconditionally demands that we believe in God, believe his revelation, and obey His precepts. "This is the greatest and the first commandment." (v. 38) This is the basis of the Second Commandment, "And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." (v. 39) The Second hinges directly from the first; since, without the need to believe, love, and obey God, there cannot exist an obligation to love one's neighbor or oneself. We are bound absolutely by Divine Law to observe these commandments, because God has commanded us to obey them; and not because we are convinced in our own mind that they are correct.
To believe God and to obey Him is the basis of all religion, which we must do in order to be saved: " On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets." (v. 40) If we refuse to believe in God, we are damned as infidels; and if we refuse to believe what He reveals, we are likewise damned as infidels: "he that believeth not shall be condemned." (Mk. 16:16)
Bergoglio says he believes in God, and in Jesus Christ, but he explicitly rejects His teaching: " You ask me if the God of the Christians forgives those who don't believe and who don't seek the faith." Bergoglio's reply: "The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience. Sin, even for those who have no faith, exists when people disobey their conscience." (!) (Michael Day (11 September 2013)."Pope Francis assures atheists: You don't have to believe in God to go to heaven". London: The Independent.) Thus, his remark about the redemption of atheists hinges on this perverse principle -- " [God] has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ... Even the atheists, Everyone!” ( David Gibson (May 22, 2013). "Pope Francis: God redeemed everyone, ‘not just Catholics’". The Washington Post.)
Hence, it is manifestly evident that Jorge Bergoglio is not a Christian at all, but an apostate and infidel. The incontrovertable proof consists in the fact that Bergoglio denies the very first principle and basis of all religion -- BELIEF, and he explicitly opposes, contradicts, and rejects the teaching of Christ on this most fundamental point which is the basis of all religion. Bergoglio preaches a false religion which does not require faith for salvation, but explicitly professes the opinion that men can be saved even if they don't believe in God. Thus, when Bergoglio says that all are redeemed, "even atheists" -- the clear and indisputable context of his words manifests plainly that he intends the term "redeemed" to be understood in the sense that it is used in the liturgy -- thus meaning "æterna redemptio" -- "eternal redemption" which is equivalent to "salus æterna" or "eternal salvation" -- thus, the term 'redemption' is used and understood in the cited passage by Bergoglio with the same meaning synonymous with 'salvation' as it is used in the Roman Canon: pro redemptione animarum suarum, pro spe salutis et incolumitatis suæ.
Thus, Bergoglio, in addition to denying the natural law, flatly denies the most fundamental teaching of the entire Scripture and Tradition of both testaments. Infidelity is the "maximun omnium peccatorum", as St. Thomas explains. Hence, sin, for people who have no faith, is first and foremost the sin of unbelief, regardless of whether they obey their perverted conscience or not. One who denies the necessity to assent to divine revelation explicitly rejects the authority of the revealing God. Bergoglio is a manifest apostate and infidel -- and therefore is not a member of the Catholic Church, nor its visible head on earth.*
Bergoglio's religion is a different religion than the Catholic religion, because his God is not the transcendent Catholic God, but the immanent "god" of Teilhard de Chardin and the Freemasons: "I believe in God - not in a Catholic God; there is no Catholic God." This is what he meant when he said, "God does not exist; do not be shocked" -- he's saying he believes in a god that is not the God of Christians as God and His attributes are understood by the perpetual tradition of Catholic theology and dogma.
It is not mere gibberish when he says, " There is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, they are persons, they are not some vague idea in the clouds ... This God spray does not exist! The three persons exist!" Jorge Bergoglio has denied the transcendent Most High God who reveals infallible dogmas and commandments (Whom he reduces to the status of a "vague idea in the clouds"; a "God spray" which "does not exist"); and has replaced Him with a "god" who is "persons" whose revelation is received not by supernatural means, but in one's conscious experience: His religion is the Enlightenment "religion" of revelation experienced in one's heart -- of an immanent Deity which reveals itself in natural human experience -- the "Mother Earth" he professed on 2 June 2016, as the one who "gave us life and protects us". Thus, the absolute primacy of one's own conscience rather than the Commandments of God. Bergoglio's religion is Gnosticism, expressed in terms of the perfidious "liberal theology" which had sprung forth from the faithless Enlightenment in the doctrine of Friedrich Schleiermacher, and his moral doctrine likewise is the vague Enlightenment belief in the "Moral Sense", as professed by the infidel Lord Shaftsbury.
There cannot be salvation by means of the works of obeying one's conscience alone without supernatural faith in God, since justification cannot be accomplished by mere human works without the sanctification of justifying grace which is received by faith and not works: "For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law." Hence, one cannot parttake of redemption without faith: " But without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him." (Heb. 11:6) According to Bergoglio there can be redemption without faith. According to Divine Revelation, there cannot be redemption without faith. Bergoglio does not believe the Divine Revelation -- he does not believe God who speaks in Revelation. Thus, Jorge Bergoglio is an infidel -- he is not a Catholic. To be a Catholic, one must profess the FAITH of the Church:
St. Vincent of Lerins, Commonitory, Ch. 2:
" [6.] Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictestsense Catholic which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors."
Ch. 3:
"7.] What then will a Catholic Christian do, if a small portion of the Church have cut itself off from thecommunion of the universal faith? What, surely, but prefer the soundness of the whole body to the unsoundness of a pestilent and corrupt member? What, if some novel contagion seek to infect not merely an insignificant portion of the Church, but the whole? Then it will be his care to cleave to antiquity, which at this day cannot possibly be seduced by anyfraud of novelty.
[8.] But what, if in antiquity itself there be found error on the part of two or three men, or at any rate of a city or even of a province? Then it will be his care by all means, to prefer the decrees, if such there be, of an ancient General Council to the rashness andignorance of a few. But what, if some error should spring up on which no such decree is found to bear? Then he must collate and consult and interrogate the opinions of the ancients, of those, namely, who, though living in various times and places, yet continuing in the communion and faith of the one Catholic Church, stand forth acknowledged and approved authorities: and whatsoever he shall ascertain to have been held, written, taught, not by one or two of these only, but by all, equally, with oneconsent, openly, frequently, persistently, that he must understand that he himself also is to believe without any doubt or hesitation."
Ch. 4:
" [10.] So also when the Arian poison had infected not an insignificant portion of the Church but almost the whole world, so that a sort of blindness had fallen upon almost all the bishops of the Latin tongue, circumvented partly by force partly by fraud, and was preventing them from seeing what was most expedient to be done in the midst of so much confusion, then whoever was a true lover and worshipper of Christ, preferring the ancient belief to the novel misbelief, escaped the pestilent infection."
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3506.htm
* The only valid pope is Benedict XVI, whose renunciation has been irrefutably demonstrated to be canonically defective, and therefore null & void.
---------------------
If cohabitation were to be considered a valid marriage, then there would be no need for sacramental marriage, since the cohabitation would fulfill the law of God -- which is heresy. Bergoglio's idea of marriage, specifically the idea that monogamous cohabitation constitutes a valid Christian marriage directly opposes the supernatural sacramentality of Holy Matrimony, and is rooted in Masonic naturalism. That is certainly no surprise, since Bergoglio's religious belief system is totally circumscribed by Masonic naturalism.
POPE BENEDICT DID NOT RESIGN THE PAPAL OFFICE, BUT ONLY RENOUNCED THE ACTIVE MINISTRY OF THE OFFICE
In order to understand the precise scope and extent of Benedict XVI's "renunciation" (not "resignation" or "abdication"), one must focus on his words which explain exactly what he renounced:
"Qui permettetemi di tornare ancora una volta al 19 aprile 2005. La gravità della decisione è stata proprio anche nel fatto che da quel momento in poi ero impegnato sempre e per sempre dal Signore. Sempre – chi assume il ministero petrino non ha più alcuna privacy. Appartiene sempre e totalmente a tutti, a tutta la Chiesa. Alla sua vita viene, per così dire, totalmente tolta la dimensione privata." ... " Il “sempre” è anche un “per sempre” - non c’è più un ritornare nel privato. La mia decisione di rinunciare all’esercizio attivo del ministero, non revoca questo."
"Here, allow me to go back once again to 19 April 2005. The real gravity of the decision was also due to the fact that from that moment on I was engaged always and forever by the Lord. Always – anyone who accepts the Petrine ministry no longer has any privacy. He belongs always and completely to everyone, to the whole Church. In a manner of speaking, the private dimension of his life is completely eliminated." ... "The 'always' is also a "for ever" – there can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to renounce the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this."
Here Benedict XVI states explicitly that the gravity his decision to accept the papacy consisted in the fact that he was thereby engaged in a committment, received from Christ, which is "for always", and his "decision to renounce the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this." Thus, Benedict did not renounce the Petrine office or its ministry, but only the active exercise of the ministry. He then goes on to say that he will no longer wield the power of office, but will remain "within the enclosure of St. Peter": " Non porto più la potestà dell’officio per il governo della Chiesa, ma nel servizio della preghiera resto, per così dire, nel recinto di san Pietro. San Benedetto, il cui nome porto da Papa, mi sarà di grande esempio in questo. Egli ci ha mostrato la via per una vita, che, attiva o passiva, appartiene totalmente all’opera di Dio." ("I no longer bear the power of office for the governance of the Church, but in the service of prayer I remain, so to speak, in the enclosure of Saint Peter. Saint Benedict, whose name I bear as Pope, will be a great example for me in this. He showed us the way for a life which, whether active or passive, is completely given over to the work of God.")
Hence, the intention expressed by Pope Benedict is to remain in the Petrine office and retain the passive aspect of its official service (munus), i.e. "the service of prayer"; and to hand over the active aspect of the munus, i.e. exercise of governance, to a successor, who will effectively fulfill the function of a coadjutor with power of jurisdiction. Thus, Benedict's clearly expressed intention was not to abdicate the office, but only to vacate the cathedra in the qualified sense of handing the seat of power of governance to one who will succeed him in the active governance, but not abdicating from the office itself. This solves the apparent mystery and explains why Benedict XVI refused to revert to being Cardinal Ratzinger; and why he retains his papal coat of arms and papal attire.
In his Declaration of Feb. 11, 2013, Pope Benedict states as the reason for his decision his waning energy and consequent inability to administer the official duties of the papacy due to advanced age: Conscientia mea iterum atque iterum coram Deo explorata ad cognitionem certam perveni vires meas ingravescente aetate non iam aptas esse ad munus Petrinum aeque administrandum.
However, he states his awareness of the spiritual nature of the official service, the munus of the petrine office; namely, it is not merely active and verbal, but is to be fulfilled to no lesser degree by praying and suffering: Bene conscius sum hoc munus secundum suam essentiam spiritualem non solum agendo et loquendo exsequi debere, sed non minus patiendo et orando. It is this passive function of the office that he expressly stated was his intention to retain in his above cited discourse of 27 Feb. 2013.
It was only the active service, the execution of the ministery regarding grave affairs of the Church and proclaiming the gospel, which he said he could no longer adequately perform: Attamen in mundo nostri temporis rapidis mutationibus subiecto et quaestionibus magni ponderis pro vita fidei perturbato ad navem Sancti Petri gubernandam et ad annuntiandum Evangelium etiam vigor quidam corporis et animae necessarius est, qui ultimis mensibus in me modo tali minuitur, ut incapacitatem meam ad ministerium mihi commissum bene administrandum agnoscere debeam.
Therefore, in the next sentence he declares his intention to renounce that ministry: Quapropter bene conscius ponderis huius actus plena libertate declaro me ministerio Episcopi Romae, Successoris Sancti Petri, mihi per manus Cardinalium die 19 aprilis MMV commisso renuntiare ita ut a die 28 februarii MMXIII, hora 20, sedes Romae, sedes Sancti Petri vacet et Conclave ad eligendum novum Summum Pontificem ab his quibus competit convocandum esse. As the eminent canonist Stefano Violi (quoted below) says, Benedict XVI did not resign the papal office, but only its administration. Since the Petrine office is indivisible (as Domenico Gravina OP explained ca. 1610), a partial act of renunciation is null and void due to defect of intention, and therefore does not suffice to vacate the Chair of Peter.
One notices the corrected Latin in this Vatican website version of the Declaratio. In the official document the word "commissum" was used, and not "commisso" as you can see in the sentence. This is one of two glaring grammatical errors in the document that, according to the canonical custom which remains in force, renders the juridical act null & void. The 1983 Code of Canon Law states explicitly that where there is no statute or custom ruling on some matter in the Code, the jurisprudence of the Roman Curia is to be followed*. The precedents go back to Pope St. Gregory VII, as I have explained in previous posts.
However, leaving aside the question of the Latin errors; the far more weighty consideration of the pope's intention not to abdicate the munus, but only to renounce the active ministry is decisive in determining the nullity of the act. It is patent that a pope who intends to renounce the active exercise of the Petrine ministry, but who expresses his intention to retain the passive service of the munus which he received on 19 April 2005, does not vacate the office. Hence, the intention to render the chair vacant is defective, since one who intends to retains the passive exercise of the munus retains the munus, and therefore still occupies the chair.
* Can. 19 - Si certa de re desit expressum legis sive universalis sive particularis praescriptum; aut consuetudo, causa, nisi sit poenalis, dirimenda est attentis legibus latis in similibus, generalibus iuris principiis cum aequitate canonica servatis, iurisprudentia et praxi Curiae Romanae, communi constantique doctorum sententia.
