"Benedict is not the pope: A reply to some critics" by Ed Feser
#41
(05-25-2022, 10:57 AM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(05-25-2022, 10:35 AM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: If BXVI really didn't resign correctly; if the things people like Patrick Coffin are saying about His Holiness' so-called resignation are true, and/or if the JPII document nullifies Francis' regime, it'd be a good thing! Because getting rid of Francis' messes would be a whole lot easier for some future pope. For that reason, I hope it's true. I can only hope he's not truly our pope. It would also nullify a lot of undesirable red hats that Francis has "gifted" the Bride of Christ with.

As well as nullify the election of the future pope that condemns Francis.  Francis has appointed the majority of the cardinal electors.  If Benedict's resignation were invalid because of some decoder ring-level slight of hand or whatever, how on Earth could a conclave full of illegitimate cardinals be valid?  It can't.  For that matter, if Francis isn't the pope for any reason whatsoever, his cardinals are illegitimate and cannot hold a valid conclave.  At that point, welcome to sedevacantism.


No, I don't think so really. The conclave isn't dependant upon having some x-number of cardinals involved in order to have it happen. ETA: it only means the Francis appointed ones wouldn't really be cardinals thus they can't participate. 

EETA: And, AND, if it's true these cardinals elected by Francis are illegitimate, then we had better find out before the next conclave or else we'll have (possibly) another anti-pope. How about that?
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#42
(05-25-2022, 11:10 AM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote:
(05-25-2022, 10:57 AM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(05-25-2022, 10:35 AM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: If BXVI really didn't resign correctly; if the things people like Patrick Coffin are saying about His Holiness' so-called resignation are true, and/or if the JPII document nullifies Francis' regime, it'd be a good thing! Because getting rid of Francis' messes would be a whole lot easier for some future pope. For that reason, I hope it's true. I can only hope he's not truly our pope. It would also nullify a lot of undesirable red hats that Francis has "gifted" the Bride of Christ with.

As well as nullify the election of the future pope that condemns Francis.  Francis has appointed the majority of the cardinal electors.  If Benedict's resignation were invalid because of some decoder ring-level slight of hand or whatever, how on Earth could a conclave full of illegitimate cardinals be valid?  It can't.  For that matter, if Francis isn't the pope for any reason whatsoever, his cardinals are illegitimate and cannot hold a valid conclave.  At that point, welcome to sedevacantism.


No, I don't think so really. The conclave isn't dependant upon having some x-number of cardinals involved in order to have it happen. ETA: it only means the Francis appointed ones wouldn't really be cardinals thus they can't participate. 

EETA: And, AND, if it's true these cardinals elected by Francis are illegitimate, then we had better find out before the next conclave or else we'll have (possibly) another anti-pope. How about that?

I didn't say a conclave had to have x-number of cardinals.  Francis has appointed a majority of the cardinal electors, and those Francis appointed cardinals will participate, whether you accept them or not.  And you'll never know if the new pope was elected by a majority of legitimate cardinals or not.  You'll have entered doubts, at the very least, to the legitimacy of the new pope AND every pope thereafter, all because you want Francis not to be the true pope.  How about that?  This is precisely why the universal acceptance of the pope is such an important Catholic doctrine.  Francis has it.  Benedict XVI doesn't.
Reply
#43
(05-25-2022, 01:07 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(05-25-2022, 11:10 AM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote:
(05-25-2022, 10:57 AM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(05-25-2022, 10:35 AM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: If BXVI really didn't resign correctly; if the things people like Patrick Coffin are saying about His Holiness' so-called resignation are true, and/or if the JPII document nullifies Francis' regime, it'd be a good thing! Because getting rid of Francis' messes would be a whole lot easier for some future pope. For that reason, I hope it's true. I can only hope he's not truly our pope. It would also nullify a lot of undesirable red hats that Francis has "gifted" the Bride of Christ with.

As well as nullify the election of the future pope that condemns Francis.  Francis has appointed the majority of the cardinal electors.  If Benedict's resignation were invalid because of some decoder ring-level slight of hand or whatever, how on Earth could a conclave full of illegitimate cardinals be valid?  It can't.  For that matter, if Francis isn't the pope for any reason whatsoever, his cardinals are illegitimate and cannot hold a valid conclave.  At that point, welcome to sedevacantism.


No, I don't think so really. The conclave isn't dependant upon having some x-number of cardinals involved in order to have it happen. ETA: it only means the Francis appointed ones wouldn't really be cardinals thus they can't participate. 

EETA: And, AND, if it's true these cardinals elected by Francis are illegitimate, then we had better find out before the next conclave or else we'll have (possibly) another anti-pope. How about that?

I didn't say a conclave had to have x-number of cardinals.  Francis has appointed a majority of the cardinal electors, and those Francis appointed cardinals will participate, whether you accept them or not.  And you'll never know if the new pope was elected by a majority of legitimate cardinals or not.  

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe not if there's an investigation into the the last conclave.


Quote:You'll have entered doubts, at the very least, to the legitimacy of the new pope AND every pope thereafter, 


I have entered doubts? Me personally? No, I think the hierarchy (at least some of them) have done it for me. 


Quote:...all because you want Francis not to be the true pope.  How about that?  This is precisely why the universal acceptance of the pope is such an important Catholic doctrine.  Francis has it.  Benedict XVI doesn't.


Do I personally wish Francis wasn't pope? Sure. But ultimately it's not about what I want. What's really important is what's true. ETA: and if this is true, I see the Hand of God in it. I see Him protecting the Holy Faith through it. If it's true, it all makes perfect sense into the last nine years of this papacy, or anti-papacy, as the case would be.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#44
(05-25-2022, 03:24 PM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: Maybe, maybe not. Maybe not if there's an investigation into the the last conclave.

There isn't going to be an investigation.  No one but the pope could have such an investigation conducted, and have it mean anything for the cardinal electors.  Instead, here is what will happen: Benevacantists will continue to spread their ideas (mostly online), they'll remain a small minority, and nothing will ever come of this particular theory.  If you disagree, I'd be happy to bet my house that 1) no investigation will be conducted before the next conclave and 2) Benevacantism will remain a fringe theory of a small minority.

Quote:I have entered doubts? Me personally? No, I think the hierarchy (at least some of them) have done it for me. 

It doesn't matter if you take your views to their logical conclusion or not.  Others will.

Quote:Do I personally wish Francis wasn't pope? Sure. But ultimately it's not about what I want. What's really important is what's true. ETA: and if this is true, I see the Hand of God in it. I see Him protecting the Holy Faith through it. If it's true, it all makes perfect sense into the last nine years of this papacy, or anti-papacy, as the case would be.

The truth is, indeed, what matters.  Benevacantism is easily enough refuted.  That folks continue to cling to the theory is a good sign that it persists for the emotional appeal.  How nice it would be if Francis could be forgotten with a simple declaration by the next (maybe valid) pope, and then we can get back to the good ole days of Benedict XVI and the hermeneutic of reform in continuity.  That is, back to implementing Vatican II but with a slightly conservative bent.
Reply
#45
Seeker of Christ, in your charity please just watch the YouTube video. Then tell me how it's wrong. It'll save you--and me--a lot of time. I don't claim to be some sort of expert on such matters. I'm just a Catholic who wants to know, not out of idle curiosity, but because it really matters. You tell me how they're wrong, and I'd appreciate that.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#46
(05-25-2022, 05:25 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote: The truth is, indeed, what matters.  Benevacantism is easily enough refuted.  That folks continue to cling to the theory is a good sign that it persists for the emotional appeal.  How nice it would be if Francis could be forgotten with a simple declaration by the next (maybe valid) pope, and then we can get back to the good ole days of Benedict XVI and the hermeneutic of reform in continuity.  That is, back to implementing Vatican II but with a slightly conservative bent.

And, like all fringe, heterodox opinions, schisms are already appearing. There have been two 'schools of thought' developing as to how to explain the theory that Benedict did not 'really' resign and they are mutually exclusive.

Steven O'Reilly posted on it a couple of days ago:

A Benepapist Civil War?
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • SeekerofChrist
Reply
#47
(05-25-2022, 05:35 PM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: Seeker of Christ, in your charity please just watch the YouTube video. Then tell me how it's wrong. It'll save you--and me--a lot of time. I don't claim to be some sort of expert on such matters. I'm just a Catholic who wants to know, not out of idle curiosity, but because it really matters. You tell me how they're wrong, and I'd appreciate that.

I finally had a chance to sit down and listen to the video. I am not an expert (neither are they), so I will offer a few comments about what they said (and did) in the video, then link to some articles that address the crux of Coffin’s argument.

The first thing that I will note is how they open this video. They spend roughly 18 minutes talking about how horrible Francis is. He’s approved of by the liberals and mainstream media. Of being cozy with the pedophiles in the Vatican, and so on. This tactic is called “poisoning the well.” It’s an informal logical fallacy that is used to discredit their target and make their audience more likely to accept the case against them. That's a nice way to prime people to accept their argument, because who wants to defend a pedophile sympathizer that is in cahoots with liberal, globalist forces?

But Francis’s worldly approval, friendships, associations, and public sins have nothing to do with whether or not Benedict validly resigned and whether “Universi Dominici gregis” can be applied against Francis’s election. We’ve had plenty of sinful, worldly popes before. Some of the Borgia popes paraded their bastard children and lovers around, even being accused by contemporary critics of turning the Vatican into a brothel. John XII was said to have raped female pilgrims that came to the Vatican, died shortly after an adulterous liaison, etc. His sins were public knowledge, too. And so forth. The sinfulness of Pope Francis has no relevance to the question of the validity of his papacy.

Coffin also has this to say, "We don't have to wait for a definitive judgement; we can achieve a moral certitude." That’s a paraphrase, not an exact quote. I don’t get it, really. You can either judge a man is the pope or not, and proceed according to your own judgement, or you can't. But if you can, then there's no reason not to be a sedevacantist. All the errors stemming from Vatican II, the entire past 60 years, can be erased and forgotten by a simple declaration they were all invalid. From John XXIII to Benedict XVI, we've got plenty of questionable, if not clearly erroneous, teachings on religious liberty, ecumenism, salvation outside the Church, etc.

My final comment, before posting the relevant links, is about an impeded see. Whenever we've had an antipope, there was a clear claim made by the real pope to the Holy See. They've never been impeded in the sense they have to be pope in private, and send coded messages that only a handful of faithful followers then interpret and present to the rest of us.. They had their own court, cardinals, and lay supporters. It was all very public. They didn’t communicate in a papal code that only a fortunate few can decode for the rest of us. Trying to save the Church from the wolves by communicating to the sheep through the occasional coded message is nothing short of a moronic plan that literally gives control of the highest office to the invaders, who then proceed to pillage and rampage against the faithful. Benedict is a very intelligent, learned man. To credit such a stupid move to him is an insult to him.

Now, to the crux of their actual argument. First, they cite “Universi Dominici gregis.” I’m not a canon lawyer. Neither are they. So, here is a real canon lawyer, who discusses the idea that this JPII papal document renders Francis’s election invalid:

https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2017/...persuaded/.

Here is Feser, again, as he addresses Coffin’s arguments about Benedict’s supposedly invalid resignation form:

https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2022...pointless/

And, of course, the original link in the OP, where he responds to an attempted rebuttal: 

https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2022/05...-some.html.

If these are not satisfactory for you, and you’re still convinced that Coffin is right, then fine. I don’t think either of us has the time for a long back and forth on this. I don’t actually begrudge any traditionalist who informs himself or herself to the best of their ability, and then reaches a conclusion about this crisis, whether that be R&R at a diocesan TLM or SSPX or FSSP, etc., or if it be sedevacantism, Benevacantism, etc. But I will only say that I’ve examined the theory and find it completely meritless.
[-] The following 2 users Like SeekerofChrist's post:
  • Iconodule, jovan66102
Reply
#48
SeekerofChrist, you're right in as much as I have no desire to get into some lengthy debate on the subject. I do appreciate your taking the time to listen to the video and offer your feedback. Time will tell who is right I suppose, and (fortunately), whether Francis is or isn't the pope has little to do with what should be our main concern: cooperation in saving our souls and keeping the Faith. 
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#49
(05-30-2022, 06:29 AM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: SeekerofChrist, you're right in as much as I have no desire to get into some lengthy debate on the subject. I do appreciate your taking the time to listen to the video and offer your feedback. Time will tell who is right I suppose, and (fortunately), whether Francis is or isn't the pope has little to do with what should be our main concern: cooperation in saving our souls and keeping the Faith. 

Fair enough, and I agree that working together to keep the Faith and gain eternal life is what matters the most.  The papacy, as important as it is, including whoever is or is not the current occupant of it, is only one part of the Catholic Faith.  The most important thing for all of us is to receive the sacraments, remain in a state of grace, and work on our spiritual life.  God be with you.
[-] The following 1 user Likes SeekerofChrist's post:
  • JacafamalaRedux
Reply
#50
Et cum spiritu tuo. ;-)
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
[-] The following 1 user Likes JacafamalaRedux's post:
  • SeekerofChrist
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)