The Chair of Peter is Vacant

[FlyersFan]

 

Strange double post.

[Anna]

Pope Francis" has been pope, supposedly, for 11 years.   He became pope because the pope before him, Pope Benedict, resigned.   However, when Pope Benedict resigned, he only rejected the exercise of powers of the papacy, and he didn't reject the investiture of the papacy, which Catholics believe is an anointing that comes straight from God.   Catholic law requires that if the pope resigns, that he rejects the investiture of the papacy, and Benedict did not do this.   Canon Law 332.2.

You've mentioned Canon Law 332.2. This is what it says exactly:

"Should it happen that the Roman Pontiff resigns from his office, it is required for validity that the resignation be freely made and properly manifested, but it is not necessary that it be accepted by anyone.”

This is all. The Pope has to resign freely, without any pressure and he has to do it clearly and publicly. There's no mention of giving up anointment or investiture or whatever. I wonder where you took all that from because in that part of the Canon Law you mentioned there's no such a thing.

There are only three ordinations into Holy Orders: deacon, presbyter and bishop. There's no papal ordination. It's no sacrament, it's not ordination. It's just an office.

The pope received his ordination when he became a bishop. That's it. And nobody can resign from priestly consecration. The sacrament remains in power forever. This is why the consecration of Eucharist by an excommunicated priest remains valid although he commits sin while doing it. This is why a Catholic who goes through apostasy cannot undo his baptism. So if papacy were a sacrament, pope Benedict couldn't have given it up even if he wanted.

No matter how you approach it, it's nonsense.

https://thedialog.org/catechetical-corne...signation/

[FlyersFan]

This is all. The Pope has to resign freely, without any pressure and he has to do it clearly and publicly. There's no mention of giving up anointment or investiture or whatever. I wonder where you took all that from because in that part of the Canon Law you mentioned there's no such a thing.

The pope received his ordination when he became a bishop. 

https://www.vatican.va/archive/cod-iuris...67_en.html

It says he 'resigns from the office'.  
But Benedict resigned from the duties.  
He did not resign from the office.
The office is a position that is anointed by God.
It has nothing to do with his ordination when he became a priest.
It has nothing to do with his assignment as Bishop.
Being Pope is not a priestly ordination, it is an anointing from God.
That is the belief.
He didn't reject that anointing and he didn't reject the office .. just the duties.

ALSO 

munus petrino

Catholic News Agency

Pope Benedict used a key phrase in his resignation speech: "munus Petrinum." This phrase is often translated "Petrine Ministry." According to the archbishop, the Latin word "munus" has many meanings: service, commitment, guide, gift, even wonder.
 
"Benedict XVI thought of his commitment as a participation in that Petrine ministry," the archbishop said. "That means that he left the papal throne, but he did not abandon this ministry."
 
Benedict XVI now acts "with a collegial and synodal dimension" and a "common ministry" that appears to echo his episcopal and papal motto: 'cooperatores veritatis,' 'cooperators of the Truth'," he said.
 
Hence, "since Pope Francis' election, there are not two Popes, but there is a de facto enlarged ministry, with both an active and a contemplative member."
 
The archbishop said that this is why Benedict did not renounce his papal name or give up his white cassock.

If you think that the Cardinals entrusted Benedict with 'munus', then he can renounce it.
But if you think that it was God who gave him that 'munus' through the Cardinals, then it can not be taken away.
And it's the Catholic belief that God makes popes, and that the Cardinals carry out Gods Will.
They have free will, and that free will is supposed to understand Gods Will.
(sometimes they clearly get it wrong, God tells them how to pick, but sometimes they don't get it)
The pope isn't under a mandate from the Cardinals, he's under a mandate from the authority of God.
He can not take away that authority on his own.
God, through the Cardinals, tells the pope 'you are Peter' and that's forever.

[schuyler]

What a load of failed insults.   
and non of it changes the fact that I'm correct. 
You don't know what you are talking about.
(and BTW .. I'm not a 'guy' ...)

Who cares? Nobody else believes you. The Catholic Church doesn't care what you say. The priesthod doesn't care what you say. Non-Catholics don't care what you say. It's not a matter of trying to insult you. It's a matter of trying to get through to you that your diatribe is misplaced. It is just expressing your own isolation. No one is required to participate or acknowldge your own delusions. You're in a Cult of One. 

And BTW, nobody cares whether you are a guy, a gal, or something inderterminate. There is no way to tell, and it is irrelevant.

[FlyersFan]

Who cares? Nobody else believes you. The Catholic Church doesn't care what you say. The priesthod doesn't care what you say. Non-Catholics don't care what you say. It's not a matter of trying to insult you. It's a matter of trying to get through to you that your diatribe is misplaced. It is just expressing your own isolation. No one is required to participate or acknowldge your own delusions. You're in a Cult of One. 

And BTW, nobody cares whether you are a guy, a gal, or something inderterminate. There is no way to tell, and it is irrelevant.

You do understand that this is a CONSPIRACY site and that people come here to have polite adult rational discussions about conspiracies, right?  Oh .. you don't get that?   Yeah ... I didn't think so.

My post isn't a 'diatribe'.  It's not 'misplaced'.  I'm not 'isolated'.  I'm not 'deluted'.  And I"m not 'in a cult of one'.

Your continued use of insulting loaded language continues to embarrass yourself.  

Address the information given and engage in a polite adult conversation about the information give, or leave the thread.

[schuyler]

You do understand that this is a CONSPIRACY site and that people come here to have polite adult rational discussions about conspiracies, right?  Oh .. you don't get that?   Yeah ... I didn't think so.

My post isn't a 'diatribe'.  It's not 'misplaced'.  I'm not 'isolated'.  I'm not 'deluted'.  And I"m not 'in a cult of one'.

Your continued use of insulting loaded language continues to embarrass yourself.  

Address the information given and engage in a polite adult conversation about the information give, or leave the thread.

While I am spcificaly addressing the "information given," you're doing a pretty good job of insulting yourself. And I wasn't aware that you are in charge. Though I suppose, since you are in a Cult of One, you can just declare yourself in charge, or Pope, or something.

[Encia22]

Mod note:

Please keep your eyes on the ball, not the player.



:beer:

[The Devil]

[schuyler]

The game here is the Catholic Church and its policies. The players adhere to the rules promulgated by the game; they don't make them and they are not in charge of interpreting them. That is left to the referees, who are in essence the "mods" of the game. In this case, the role of the referees is performed by the priesthood. A player can argue with a priest, and a priest can escalate a matter to the Bishop, who can take it to the Arch-Bishop, who can take it to a Cardinal, who can take it to the Pope. The Pope, in turn, can settle the matter by decree, or he can refer it to any of several committees, councils, or groups as he sees fit. These groups can recommend changes to the Pope, but ultimately it is his decision. One good example is Vatican II, a massive and comprehensive revision of the rules of the game. It doesn't matter that many many players opposed these changes. The players were not in charge.

Now, this heirarchy is a strict patriarchy.  It is not a democracy. Women are excluded and relegated to support roles.  Though any player can voice objections to policy and interpretations, unless the priesthood takes note of said objections, they will go nowhere. In this case we have a person who is a player, but not a part of the heirarchy of the Church, disputing a point of interpretation. No one who is not a part of this organization has any say whatsoever on this issue. Attempting to sway these people one way or another is fruitless. It would be like trying to influence citizens of Portugal on taking a position on the American election. They may very well be persuaded one way or another, but it doesn't matter because they have no say. They do not get a vote. It is a complete and utter waste of energy to attempt it. 

So what are the options? One is to start your own religion. It's not impossiblle. Luther did it. And the many splinter groups in Christianity are testimony to this trend. Many of them are cults, but some of actually risen to be actual religions. What is the difference between a cult and a religion? It's size. We have the emperor Constantine to thank for allowing Christianity to become a religion instead of remain a cult. 

A second option is to move this discussion to a forum where it matters. I'm sure there are many Catholic forums where members actually have a vested interest in the issues. If you can persuade a sufficient number of members that these theological points are important, you could start a movement. Get some members of the priesthood interested and it is theoretically possible to get change before the current Pope dies, at which point the entire issue becomes moot. 

Meanwhile, arguing how many angels fit on the head of a pin, is a useless endeavor.

[Anna]

It says he 'resigns from the office'.  
But Benedict resigned from the duties.  
He did not resign from the office.
The office is a position that is anointed by God.
It has nothing to do with his ordination when he became a priest.
It has nothing to do with his assignment as Bishop.
Being Pope is not a priestly ordination, it is an anointing from God.
That is the belief.
He didn't reject that anointing and he didn't reject the office .. just the duties.

This is just your personal opinion. Nowhere in the Canon Law is such a distinction made. I quoted to you the part about the Pope's resignation. You can find nothing about God's anointment there, office vs duties, investiture or whatever. 

Here's pope Benedict's resignation speech:

https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-...ratio.html

It's obvious that his intention to resign was clear and that he did that freely. And that is all that is required for the pope to resign.