In a recent column for First Things, George Weigel, the aging icon of Catholic neo-conservatism, proclaimed a fundamentally important and eminently timely truth with impeccable clarity:
“The Petrine Office is not divisible in any fashion, nor can it be a dyarchy [sic] in which one exercises the mission of governance and another exercises a mission of prayer.”
Amen, brother!
True to form, however, he also did what the neo-cons do best; namely, he spun a web of illogic and presumption so dense that one might come away unaware that the Church is presently mired in an historical crisis of the pontifical kind.
At issue is the recent presentation given by Archbishop Gänswein concerning the status of the Pope Contemplatus, Benedict XVI, and by necessary extension, the blasphemous Argentinian heretic who holds court next door.
In an effort to provide his readers with a bit of background, Weigel writes:
Ever since Pope Benedict XVI’s abdication, there have been voices insisting that Pope Benedict didn’t really mean to abdicate, or didn’t do so canonically, or simply laid down the burden of governance while somehow remaining “pope,” or some other such foolishness—and this despite Benedict’s insistence that, yes, he meant to do exactly what he did.
To date, these voices have been limited to the woolier fringes of Catholic commentary, where conspiracy theories abound; to academics with too much time on their hands; and to columnists (chiefly Italian) with space to fill.
A few weeks ago, however, this entirely unnecessary brouhaha was exacerbated by Benedict’s longtime secretary, Archbishop Georg Gaenswein, now the Prefect of the Papal Household.
The cognitive disconnect on display here is severe.
Weigel writes as if Benedict’s intent in the matter (i.e., exactly “what he meant to do” by way of his Declaratio of 11 February 2013) was never really a matter of legitimate debate, and this in spite of the fact that Archbishop Gänswein confirmed as much.
What’s even more stunning is Weigel’s unbridled arrogance.
Among those whom he dismisses as occupants of the “woolier fringe” are such men of repute as Antonio Socci, Vittorio Messori, and Professor of Canon Law, Stefano Violi. Oh how I would like to see any or all of these men respond to the slight! Of course, I doubt that any will stoop so low as to acknowledge it.
In any case, Weigel apparently believes that he has more insight into the situation than Benedict’s longtime and current personal secretary, Archbishop Gänswein, who also happens to be a Doctor of Canon Law.
According to Weigel:
Archbishop Gaenswein’s reference to title and vesture [retaining the name Benedict and continuing to vest in papal garb] confirms what many of us thought three years ago: the decisions about these matters made in 2013 were mistaken.
Come now… Archbishop Gänswein’s “reference” in no way suggests that Benedict’s decisions were mistaken; rather, he is telling us in no uncertain terms that they were made deliberately; in order to convey his intent to transform and expand the Petrine ministry!
Obviously, Weigel thinks that he knows better:
A papal abdication, no matter what the circumstances, involves renouncing the Office of Peter, not reconceptualizing it. No good end is served by suggestions that the Petrine ministry in our day has been redefined or expanded.
Wrong again. The present situation doesn’t involve mere “suggestions” – it concerns a gravely important revelation (or better stated, confirmation) that comes to us directly from the most credible of sources.
Only a totally disinterested party (or self-important fool) could possibly dismiss it or otherwise take it lightly.
Weigel is correct, however, when he implies that a papal abdication does not involve an act that is carried out with the intent of reconceptualizing, redefining, or expanding the Petrine ministry.
On this note, it would seem that he knows very well that such an attempt as this would be utterly futile; thus rendering the alleged act of abdication invalid, and furthermore, if this be the justification for convening a conclave to elect a successor, then it too would be invalid.
The stakes are exceedingly high, in other words, and Weigel (and every other Catholic with a pulse) damn well knows it.
The million dollar question for those who occupy the ecclesiastical mushy middle is simple:
Who is better qualified to provide insight into Benedict’s intentions; George Weigel or Georg Gänswein?
For readers of this space, it’s a bona fide no-brainer, but apparently not so much for everyone else.
Take, for example, canon lawyer Dr. Edward Peters who wrote in a blog post entitled, George is right, Georg is wrong:
“George Weigel has an excellent critique of Abp. Georg Gänswein’s weird theory…”
Let me make sure I understand this correctly:
So… the American think tanker who pontificates on matters ecclesial from the distant suburbs of Washington, D.C. has gifted the Catholic world with “excellent” insights, while the Archbishop who has daily contact with Benedict, and has for more than a decade, only managed to float a “weird theory.”
OK. Got it.
St. Dymphna, Patron Saint of those who suffer delirium, ora pro nobis!
The ubiquitous and extremely tiresome Ed Peters once again weighs in with foot firmly in mouth and arrogance firmly on display.
Not having learned his lesson from the Father Guarnizo case, in which the amateur canonist Peters assured us that Father was wrong to deny Holy Communion to a flaming lesbian Buddhist, and who had this opinion shot down by real canon lawyers (and who, amazingly, will still not let go of his false assertions regarding the Guarnizo affair), Mr Peters now comes to the aide of a person like Weigel. Two peas is a pod.
A very fine article. Many thanks.
It may be that Mundabor’s blog has the answer to this insanity, and this is just another case of too much cocaine- use causing another brain to lose the ability to draw logical conclusions or stay in complete touch with reality. https://mundabor.wordpress.com/2016/06/09/coke-francis/
At first I started laughing at your Michael Jackson papal rendition, and then tears came…..I’m sorry this is just all too much for me these days. The whole world has gone mad , thank God and His Blessed Mother that we have the rosary…..heading outside to say one before my statue of Our Lady, will be praying for you Louie , and all who frequent here.
Your prayers are appreciated, thank you.
I’ll admit, I still swoon over the Benedictine papacy. Something about the current state of affairs just seems amiss. Though a man of the Council, Benedict seems to have been grasping the utter disaster in the wake of Vatican II.
Is it possible that Benedict doesn’t appreciate the unmitigated disaster of the Bergoglian papacy? Does Benedict not cringe at the daily incoherence emitting from the Chair of Peter? Surely Benedict recognises Amoris Laetitia for the chocolates covered anthrax infected horse manure (HT to Louie) that it is!
Is Ganswain speaking in riddles? In code? Why can’t Benedict just speak for himself?
Thank you.
Archbishop Lefebvre:
“Are we not in those times of which Our Lord said: “A day shall come when men will say to you, ‘Christ is here, Christ is there, Christ is in the country, Christ is in the mountains.’ “? “Do not go,” Our Lord said, “Do not go.” Are we not in these latter times when the devil employs every means to disperse us, to tear us apart, to divide us, so as to reduce the flock to nothing?
In these critical moments, we must remain with that which is surest. We must avoid doubtful things.
We must make our stand on things that are certain, absolutely certain, without a thousandth per cent of doubt: our Creed, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Sacraments, devotion to the Most Blessed Virgin. We cannot go wrong there. If we are firmly attached to these things we can work out our salvation. Our Lord willed these things for our salvation. So let us adhere to these things with all our heart.
Let us adore Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist. Let us have respect for Our Lord, our God, Our Saviour, our Creator: for Him Who is everything for us. How should we dare to present ourselves standing before Him Who will be our Judge at the end of time? Let us kneel before Our Lord with profound devotion. Let us receive Him in our hearts as the greatest treasure that we can have here below. Let us thank God for coming into our poor bodies, into our poor souls, sinners that we are. May God deign to reside in us for some time in His Body and in His Blood—this is the most beautiful, the grandest thing that God could do. And along with this respect for Our Lord Jesus Christ, let us love Him with our whole heart. Let us serve Him. Let us consider Him truly as our Shepherd.
Let us ask this of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary— of the Most Blessed Virgin who had only one name on her lips, only one name in her heart, that of her son, Jesus. Let it be for us as it was for her. Let us have one love only here below, one genuine love, in which we love all other creatures—but all other creatures should bring us to this love and not remove us from it. Let us love Our Lord Jesus Christ with our whole heart, with our whole soul, with our whole strength.”
If Benedict is truly repentant of his participation in the Second Vatican Council and his subsequent endorsement of all things New Order, perhaps witnessing the horror of Bergoglio (without the freedom to protest violently) is part of his suffering on earth to lessen his purgatory. I don’t know—it’s just a thought!
I always remember that in 2003 Weigel lectured Pope John Paul II, who opposed it, about how wonderful the Iraq War was, even though that war violated almost every plank of Catholic Just War doctrine.
Just another example of how some will never see. No matter how intelligent, well spoken or confident one is, today, 1+1 could never = 2 for some, and for others, for whatever reason God so chooses, 1+1 could only =2. I’ve tried to force these square pegs into circle holes more than once. It’s just IMPOSSIBLE!
I guess the more intelligent you think you are, the more impossible it is to see clearly. To think, these pompous looking stupid men tell everyone what to think. They’re intimidators of the Faith, yet they have NO clue and probably never will. They should have no voice. NONE.
Ratzinger is evil. For some reason (and I have no idea why) good people….truly good people….keep trying to make excuses for him (and for the other vat 2 false “popes”). No excuses are necessary for them….they all promoted the prostestant/jew (and therefore of the devil) inspired vatican 2 council.
NONE of these bad men who rose to the rank of “pope” in the vatican 2 religion were/are stupid or were/are somehow “disoriented” (as God grants all of us free will)….they were/are all VASTLY intelligent. They have no excuse for the evil they have done and none of us need to keep scraping the bottom of the barrel to come up with excuses for them. They are all BAD men who are not of the Catholic Faith.
Cortez
IMO, once you stop trying to figure out how vatican 2 is part of Catholicism and simply realize that it isnt, you will rest easier at night. Of course you will still see the evil for what it is and continue to fight against it….but the idea of helplessly trying to work out how Catholicism and vatican twoism are one in the same will no longer trouble you.
In very simple terms, everything prior to vatican 2 is Catholic….everything after vatican 2 is strictly of Satan. And when I say everything after vatican 2 is of Satan, I mean EVERYTHING.
As with the Eternal Father eternally fathering the Eternal Son, the Logos… sicut erat in principium, nunc, et semper, in saecula saeculorum…., so too in the realm of the temporal, once a Papa always a Papa.
Notwithstanding the constant, unrelenting tendency of positivistic, progressive, liberal lawmakers to diminish fatherhood — a veritable “war against fathers”—-, a child cannot be a child of two fathers unless, and arguably so, with the laws of adoption which insists the father of the adopted son by law, either by testament or intestate, to bequeath his earthly substance…his accumulated temporal wealth…to his adopted child, while allowing the child freely to renounce and disown his natural father and all his gifts notwithstanding the intrinsic genetic deposit of his natural father.
Therefore, even if an earthly father, natural or by laws of adoption, were to fall into a coma, in relation to his children his fatherhood remains inviolable, intact and whole…and even after death by way of Testament. Then how much more so, notwithstanding illness or infirmity, for the spiritually divine office of the validly elected Papacy that was founded by our Lord Jesus Christ, the very Word Incarnate Himself.
By whose authority, or by what law, Canon or otherwise, contrary to the Providence of the Holy Trinity, could Pope Benedict VI create a Papal diarchy? Only an absolute monarchy — which the office of the Papacy is not, and never was insofar as he is the Vicar of Christ and, as a Bishop, an icon of God the Father —- would hazard to try. (These modernist prelates, including, but not limited to, Paul VI and Francis I, pretend they are communitarian democrats, but at heart forgetting their own fatherhood they become totalitarians trying to effect change willy-nilly for the sake of change.)
But in defence of fatherhood, both spiritual and temporal, I repeat: once a Papa, always a Papa.
rich, I certainly understand what you are saying and, sadly, I fear it is true of Ratzinger. However, we must never dismiss God’s mercy (not the Bergoglio version!!) when true repentance and deep sorrow begs for forgiveness. This not an excuse, it is a reality and we must all be grateful because we are all in need of it. Our Lord forgave the “good” thief while on the Cross and took him to paradise on that day. God’s mercy has no limit. Ratzinger was (is?)a bad man with high intelligence who promoted the false religion of Vatican II. I am not looking for excuses for his horrible and sinful behavior. But wouldn’t it be wonderful if he made a very public and sincere apology while condemning the council and calling Bergoglio the “supreme heretic” who followed the other “heretic” popes. I know it’s a stretch, but we can dream, can’t we?
If you don’t already, I suggest you also read the Liturgy of Hours and the Psalms–great helps in keeping perspective through times of spiritual persecution, such as these.
In todays reading from the LOH, St Ambrose describes the Psalms as “a confession of Faith in song”, which “soothes the temper, distracts from care, lightens the burden of sorrow.” “a source of security…wisdom. a shield, celebration of holiness .. a vision of serenity and promise of peace and harmony…” Sometimes we forget that God promised us those as well as persecution.
Thank you for your prayers, and God Bless you.
I have recently been given the grace to figure this out and see it. After years of struggle, things make sense.
Thanks, Rich. I do see that everything after Vatican 2 is evil. I don’t have it ALL figured out, but I do see how Our Lady of Fatima and Our Lady of Good Success warned us of these times. However, how could the Church be in crisis if it’s not under attack? Our Lady of Good Success said the Church would be in crisis, but said that when everything seems at its worst, that would mark her hour. She will crush the old serpant’s head and the Church will be restored…so yes, I agree everything after Vatican 2 is bad. Yet, Our Lady of Good Success also said something to the effect that Our Lord will remain in the tabernacle where He will not be treated well-to say the least. She also said that a saint would ALWAYS be living in her convent in Quito, Ecuador. This is the same convent where they only have N.O. Mass today. And imagine, a saint is living there now. A saint in that convent receives Our Lord, and Our Lord is being profaned in tabernacles everwhere. Also, if the Church is undergoing a crucifixion of Her own, than I’m standing there. I’m going to try to look at the wounds and acknowledge them even if I don’t quite get it all. Thanks for your charitable thoughts. I appreciate your wisdom, and I agree with you on almost everything. I just feel staring at the blood and acknowledging that my Church, The Catholic Church, is under attack is what I’ll do. If I were at the foot of the cross, I wouldn’t agree with the persecutors, but I hope I would at least be there with my Lord. I do sleep well though, after saying my rosary, my comfort. I know Our Lady will take care of everything.
Our Lady of Good Success…pray for us!
Send us the Holy Prelate which you promised would restore our Catholic Church.
The question is not wether there are co-Popes, but what one of the two IS Pope, and what shenanigans took place before and during the last Conclave. To me, this is the real question of the day.
Yea, that would be a dream come true, wouldn’t it? More, a prayer request fulfilled. If Pope Benedict did that, it would indeed be a day of profound joy in heaven and on earth! Let’s pray now.
No question about it….God in His infinite mercy will always forgive the contrite sinner. Like you I would be doing jumping jacks of joy if Benedict ever came clean….I would be thrilled for him and thrilled for the Church. Sadly, the realistic part of me is pretty convinced that this will never happen.
I appreciate the compliments Cortez….always good to talk to you (btw…im not too wise….most here are MUCH wiser than me..lol).
On your video, at marker 2:16 – 2:22, there is a statue of
“Our Lady of the Apocalypse.”
It is a rare one.
I wonder if our 2 popes mean anything by having it in the photo?
http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/images_A-E/A051_Apocalipse.jpg
–
Thank you for the video, Louie.
Sad song indeed — as you said, Theresa.
The video is pretty stupid and infantile. It drags down this space to the level of a schoolyard brawl. Let’s stick with facts.
Georgianne
It took me a while as well. I struggled for quite a while with the idea that God would allow heretics to be in charge of His Church. Once I came to the logical conclusion (based solely on Catholic teaching) that this was an impossibility, and that these men were obviously not of His Church, I found a certain peace. What is going on is still horrible and many souls are being lead astray….but the true Catholic Church is not responsible; willfully ignorant people who fail to learn their faith, and allow themselves to be lead astray by these heretics, are responsible for their own demise at the end of the day. I believe it was St John Vianney who said that most Catholics go to hell because they never knew their faith.
These are the facts as stupid, infantile and corny as they may be. Glad to see you loathe them.
The Vatican II “church” is stupid and infantile (at best!). Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire…..and that’s a fact! A very sad fact, to be sure.
I am not above a moderate use of invective, denunciation and humiliation
to cause the Modernist heretic to be distressed enough to reappraise his position, and perform a self-correction.
The video struck me as a trivial, puerile and an unnecessary
addition considering that the article’s text is adequate to the subject. Sometimes Christians have to take it on the chin.
Michael F Poulin
The neo-cons do not need the intercession of St. Dymphna but of St. Michael the Archangel. Their agenda is Satanic. Weigel has been a useful idiot for the Novus Ordo Church ever since he decided to become “Saint” John Paul II’s gay lover. Ugh.
With what scourges of rebuke lashed I not my soul to make it follow me, struggling to go after Thee!
St Augustine
Confessions
Yet another demonstration that Archbishop Lefebvre was chosen by God Himself to point us to the true Catholic Church. John XXIII and JPII canonized? Huh? VII propaganda. Archbishop Lefebvre will follow in the footsteps of Athanasius to sainthood.