Wednesday, November 13, 2019


Benedict XVI meeting recipients of this year’s Ratzinger Prize on Sunday. They were able “to engage in an intense and deep conversation with the Pope Emeritus” the Ratzinger Foundation said @NCRegister

The question is and remains, why did His Holiness abdicate? Can’t a frail pope just stay at home in the Vatican and be pope? Yessss!

This photos taken this past Sunday:


rcg said...

He didn’t know who to trust and who to fire.

Tom Makin said...

I imagine he now wrestles with his decision to step aside. As bad as it may have been, I don't know that Pope Benedict could have foreseen the state of the church as it is today and as it is being guided by the liberation theologist from Argentina. I'm still mystified by what happened and wonder if we will ever know the true story of this abdication and subsequent "election" of the current occupant of the Chair of Saint Peter.

Anonymous said...

Well, I don't agree with Jimmy Carter that often, but even he questioned the idea of the upper 70s Democrats running for president (Biden and Sanders) serving in such a high position at that age. Does anyone really need to be running anything at age 90? But whether you agree with that or not, no one can say Catholic clergy are slack or early retirees compared with their Protestant brethren. In the Episcopal Church for instance, bishops and pastors (rectors) must retire by 72; I think it is 70 for Methodists and clergy of the Church of England (in days of old, say before the 1960s, Anglican clergy would often serve til death or at least their 70s---after Archbishop of Canterbury Geoffrey Fisher retired at age 74 in 1961---he crowned Queen Elizabeth in 1953---70 became the latest retirement age for the primate of all England).

Atlanta's own Wilton Gregory left for DC last spring at age 72, I thought an old age to be taking up a new bishopic. But he probably would not be doing so unless he were to become a cardinal, and cardinals typically serve til they are 80.

Bob said...

Many things were issued under John Paul II's name in his declining years showing manipulation, and Ratzinger well aware of that, and far more surrounded by smilers with knives beneath cloaks, and he wanted to preserve his legacy untainted by conflicting documents, judging that of far more importance in the long run, than a few fading years of effectively nuetered Papacy....

perhaps he also envisioned, at least partially successfully, that his suprise resignation would cause many invisible players to step out of shadows in their rush to take power, and so make known the real enemies we must fight.

Mark Thomas said...


Retired Pope Benedict says it was his 'duty' to resign from papacy


Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI/Cardinal Ratzinger believes that a frail Pope must resign as Pope.

It is even the "duty" of such a Pope to retire, in Emeritus' estimation.

Emeritus/Cardinal Ratzinger has insisted that that the "modern Papacy" cannot operate in "traditional" Papal fashion.

In particular, he cited the rigor of worldwide modern Papal travel as a key factor in the manner in which the "modern Papacy" must change.

Emeritus Benedict XVI told "Italian journalist Elio Guerriero that after his visit to Mexico and Cuba in March 2012, he felt he was "incapable of fulfilling" the demands of another international trip, especially with World Youth Day 2013 scheduled for Brazil.

"With the program set out by John Paul II for these (World Youth) days, the physical presence of the pope was indispensable," he told Guerriero in an interview, which is included in the journalist's upcoming biography of Pope Benedict.

"This, too, was a circumstance which made my resignation a duty," the pope said.

Upon consulting with his doctor, he said, it became clear "that I would never be able to take part in the World Youth Day in Rio de Janeiro."

"From that day, I had to decide in a relatively short time the date of my retirement," he said.


Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

The revolutionary nature of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI's 2013 A.D. resignation may alter the Church forever.

His resignation in question was not revolutionary. Papal resignations are part of Church history.

What is revolutionary, and may forever alter the Papacy, is his insistence that physical strength is a requirement that a modern Pope must possess to serve the Church properly.

The reason is that Pope Saint John Paul II established travel demands to which his successors must adhere.

The travel demands that modern Popes have inflicted upon themselves have altered the Papacy, according to Emeritus.

Will Emeritus XVI's thinking in regard to the above prevail?

Should said thinking prevail, then we can say "goodbye" to the notion that a Pope should serve as Pontiff until he has fallen asleep in the Lord.


Mark Thomas

Православный физик said...

So much to say....tomorrow.