Message of BenedictXVI on the occasion of dubia Cardinal Meisner's Requiem Mass

[M-Dent]

For example, what Pope Benedict said in a short message for the funeral of Cardinal Joachim Meisner is, according to me, of great significance.

he learned to let go and to live out of a deep conviction that the Lord does not abandon his church, even when the boat has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing.

Cardinal Ratzinger gave a similar themed homily prior to his elevation to the Papacy.

How many winds of doctrine have we known in recent decades, how many ideological currents, how many ways of thinking. The small boat of the thought of many Christians has often been tossed about by these waves - flung from one extreme to another: from Marxism to liberalism, even to libertinism; from collectivism to radical individualism; from atheism to a vague religious mysticism; from agnosticism to syncretism and so forth. Every day new sects spring up, and what St Paul says about human deception and the trickery that strives to entice people into error (cf. Eph 4: 14) comes true.

Today, having a clear faith based on the Creed of the Church is often labeled as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, that is, letting oneself be “tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine”, seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.

vatican.va/gpII/documents/homily-pro-eligendo-pontifice_20050418_en.html

Yes. The same point can be made.

 

[Augustine]

What makes you think Pope Benedict and Pope Francis are not on the same page? From all accounts, the two have a great relationship and there is no rift between them.

At a personal level, Pope Francis and Bp. Benedict have a great relationship. Doctrinally and pastorally, they couldn’t be on more different pages and the rift couldn’t be deeper between them.

 

[commenter]

Does Pope Emeritus Benedict offer public Masses on an ongoing basis? Does he preach, or give talks, in the Vatican or elsewhere? I am sure he has a chapel in his residence, but does he have a church that he normally goes to? Which one?

 

[janeway529]

Does Pope Emeritus Benedict offer public Masses on an ongoing basis? Does he preach, or give talks, in the Vatican or elsewhere? I am sure he has a chapel in his residence, but does he have a church that he normally goes to? Which one?

According to Mons. Georg Ganswein, personal secretary of Pope Emeritus, Benedict XVI does not offer public Masses. However, he continues to celebrate daily Mass in his residence, which includes a chapel. He also writes responses to letters and some things that concern him directly.

 

[Robert_Sock]

At a personal level, Pope Francis and Bp. Benedict have a great relationship. Doctrinally and pastorally, they couldn’t be on more different pages and the rift couldn’t be deeper between them.

Why did Pope Benedict retire at such a critical time? Was he somehow coerced to retire? I always wondered about his retirement given it’s not the norm for a Pope to retire!

 

[TheDoctor]

Why did Pope Benedict retire at such a critical time? Was he somehow coerced to retire? I always wondered about his retirement given it’s not the norm for a Pope to retire!

His health. You can read his retirement statement here. No plots. No sinister conspiracies. No World Bank/Illuminati plans as far as anyone has ever said.

I can feel the heaviness in his heart.
w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2013/february/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20130211_declaratio.html

 

[OraLabora]

Doctrinally and pastorally, they couldn’t be on more different pages and the rift couldn’t be deeper between them.

You know this how exactly?

 

[Theodora]

Cardinal Ratzinger gave a similar themed homily prior to his elevation to the Papacy.

Yes. The same point can be made.

I wanted to quote your entire entry M-Dent, but only the above showed up when I hit Quote.

A wanted to comment: “thumb-up” to what you quoted. What Pope Benedict wrote in his message also struck a chord with me. An example that shows to have “deep, abiding faith”.

What truly hit home with me from Cardinal Ratzinger’s homily was this "Whereas relativism, that is, letting oneself be “tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine”, So well said for what relativism is. The rest also is right-on…

(I have to learn how to enclose quotes like you did. How do I do it? Where can I find the instructions for this on this board? )

 

[Robert_Sock]

His health. You can read his retirement statement here. No plots. No sinister conspiracies. No World Bank/Illuminati plans as far as anyone has ever said.

I can feel the heaviness in his heart.
w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2013/february/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20130211_declaratio.html

How many other popes retired because of health?

 

[Augustine]

Why did Pope Benedict retire at such a critical time?

BXVI explained himself that it was for health reasons. I’m sure that he never thought that he could control who his successor would be and left the choice to his cardinals and put his hope in God. Whatever one thinks what BXVI thought or what the cardinals thought, we should follow him putting our hope in God and not in whomever happens to be the successor of St. Peter.

 

[graciew]

BXVI explained himself that it was for health reasons. I’m sure that he never thought that he could control who his successor would be and left the choice to his cardinals and put his hope in God. Whatever one thinks what BXVI thought or what the cardinals thought, we should follow him putting our hope in God and not in whomever happens to be the successor of St. Peter.

And why did he resign if a Pope is like a decoration on a cake for you?
Because he was no longer decorative??
Is this what Popes are for you?
Read his letter and the reverence ,respect and seriousness with which he addresses his own ministry…
Why not follow him in his respect for the Petrine Office and his own example with the Popes he is and has been under,instead of making up stuff?

w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2013/february/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20130211_declaratio.html

 

[graciew]

Why did Pope Benedict retire at such a critical time? Was he somehow coerced to retire? I always wondered about his retirement given it’s not the norm for a Pope to retire!

Robert,take your time to read the original letter
w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2013/february/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20130211_declaratio.html

And he has a book interview style,The Last Testament where you can read him.in his own words if you want. Benedict XVI and Peter Seewald." The Last Testament"Sept. 2016.

 

[Augustine]

And why did he resign if a Pope is like a decoration on a cake for you?

What the…???

 

[Robert_Sock]

Robert,take your time to read the original letter
w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2013/february/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20130211_declaratio.html

And he has a book interview style,The Last Testament where you can read him.in his own words if you want. Benedict XVI and Peter Seewald." The Last Testament"Sept. 2016.

Yes, I have read it, but I still have my own personal reservations that there may be more to it in that it’s not the norm for a pope to resign, period. Drastically downsizing his daily activities and duties I can fully accept, but for any pope to retire while seemingly having his intellect still intact?

 

[abucs]

I think it is clear that Benedict was throwing his (not insubstantial) moral force behind Cardinal Meisner’s at his Requiem Mass.

I have sympathy for Francis but I think he is going about his changes the wrong way and when he offers vague criticism to journalists targeted at people questioning his direction it is a really bad look in my opinion.

I think Francis sees people like his sister who is divorced and remarried and who are faithful and good people and finds it difficult for the church’s position to be that they are living in a state of serious sin. The same for people like his nephew who is co-habituating with his girlfriend. Francis believes the church should be merciful to such people and I agree with him. But I think Church ideology and philosophy has developed over a long time and for good reason. I think if the pope wishes for people like his immediate family to receive communion then it has to be done in a way that is consistent with the church’s revealed ideas of sin and grace.

For the pope to undermine the Synod of the family by changing the agreed position of the Synod to be closer to his own thoughts, and to refuse to discuss the conflicts of his thoughts with the greater understanding of the church, looks like (forgive me) weak leadership.

This to me reflects what has gone wrong more generally in the west where each issue becomes an emotional one rather than a logical one. People who disagree are scared, or angry or rigid etc. instead of having valid points that need to be answered.

It is in many ways a concentration on emotional examples such as his divorced sister not being in good standing instead of a logical and systematic idea which reflect the coherence of Christian thought.

So if people who divorce are suddenly in good standing with the church then apart from contradicting the words of Jesus, what is to stop a husband dumping his wife and children for a younger new wife and to expect to be in good standing with the church and not be in serious sin. What does the church tell the abandoned wife and kids? Do they say that the church has no problems with the husbands/fathers actions?

I think logically and systematically this would be the position under Francis’ views and it seems Francis’ idea is not to discuss this but refer to people who are not on board as rigid and unmerciful which I have mentioned is a very bad look and repeating the incoherence of the Progressives in secular life.

I am very much on Francis’ side in trying to find ways to be merciful and to be inclusive to a wide range of good people but I see it as a mistake to think in narrow, emotional terms that ignore such important concepts as sin.

It is a further mistake to offer indirect but biting condemnations of good people who have valid points and refuse to dialogue with them.

God bless Francis and his church.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I think it is clear that Benedict was throwing his (not insubstantial) moral force behind Cardinal Meisner’s at his Requiem Mass.

I have sympathy for Francis but I think he is going about his changes the wrong way and when he offers vague criticism to journalists targeted at people questioning his direction it is a really bad look in my opinion.

I think Francis sees people like his sister who is divorced and remarried and who are faithful and good people and finds it difficult for the church’s position to be that they are living in a state of serious sin. The same for people like his nephew who is co-habituating with his girlfriend. Francis believes the church should be merciful to such people and I agree with him. But I think Church ideology and philosophy has developed over a long time and for good reason. I think if the pope wishes for people like his immediate family to receive communion then it has to be done in a way that is consistent with the church’s revealed ideas of sin and grace.

For the pope to undermine the Synod of the family by changing the agreed position of the Synod to be closer to his own thoughts, and to refuse to discuss the conflicts of his thoughts with the greater understanding of the church, looks like (forgive me) weak leadership.

This to me reflects what has gone wrong more generally in the west where each issue becomes an emotional one rather than a logical one. People who disagree are scared, or angry or rigid etc. instead of having valid points that need to be answered.

It is in many ways a concentration on emotional examples such as his divorced sister not being in good standing instead of a logical and systematic idea which reflect the coherence of Christian thought.

So if people who divorce are suddenly in good standing with the church then apart from contradicting the words of Jesus, what is to stop a husband dumping his wife and children for a younger new wife and to expect to be in good standing with the church and not be in serious sin. What does the church tell the abandoned wife and kids? Do they say that the church has no problems with the husbands/fathers actions?

I think logically and systematically this would be the position under Francis’ views and it seems Francis’ idea is not to discuss this but refer to people who are not on board as rigid and unmerciful which I have mentioned is a very bad look and repeating the incoherence of the Progressives in secular life.

I am very much on Francis’ side in trying to find ways to be merciful and to be inclusive to a wide range of good people but I see it as a mistake to think in narrow, emotional terms that ignore such important concepts as sin.

It is a further mistake to offer indirect but biting condemnations of good people who have valid points and refuse to dialogue with them.

God bless Francis and his church.

Sometimes it is not the husband who initiates the divorce. I was reading the minibiography of actress Jane Powell yesterday. She was married 5 times!!
It amazes me the multiple marriages that took place in Hollywood back in
the 40’s and 50’s and 60’s.

 

[commenter]

I think it is clear that Benedict was throwing his (not insubstantial) moral force behind Cardinal Meisner’s at his Requiem Mass.

If Pope Emeritus wanted to make a public statement about the Church in general, he would do so, and not at a requiem homily. For his whole priestly ministry he has spoken as directly and explicitly as the situation called for in the proper forum.

He isn’t a prisoner anywhere, he has the ear of the media when/if he wants it. He can go wherever he wants, talk to whoever he wants. It would be foolish for assume when Benedict says “A” it really means “ABC and D”. Keep in mind some of his own confidential staff are now confidential staff of Pope Francis.

 

[mrdrifter]

If Pope Emeritus wanted to make a public statement about the Church in general, he would do so, and not at a requiem homily. For his whole priestly ministry he has spoken as directly and explicitly as the situation called for in the proper forum.

He isn’t a prisoner anywhere, he has the ear of the media when/if he wants it. He can go wherever he wants, talk to whoever he wants. It would be foolish for assume when Benedict says “A” it really means “ABC and D”. Keep in mind some of his own confidential staff are now confidential staff of Pope Francis.

And yet… perhaps the Pope Emeritus indeed wanted to make a public statement. What bothers the people aligned with Pope Francis is that opponents of giving communion to the divorced and remarried are encouraged by the remarks of the Pope Emeritus. Private reassurances from the ex-Pope won’t change this.

 

[Robert_Sock]

I think it is clear that Benedict was throwing his (not insubstantial) moral force behind Cardinal Meisner’s at his Requiem Mass.

I have sympathy for Francis but I think he is going about his changes the wrong way and when he offers vague criticism to journalists targeted at people questioning his direction it is a really bad look in my opinion.

I think Francis sees people like his sister who is divorced and remarried and who are faithful and good people and finds it difficult for the church’s position to be that they are living in a state of serious sin. The same for people like his nephew who is co-habituating with his girlfriend. Francis believes the church should be merciful to such people and I agree with him. But I think Church ideology and philosophy has developed over a long time and for good reason. I think if the pope wishes for people like his immediate family to receive communion then it has to be done in a way that is consistent with the church’s revealed ideas of sin and grace.

For the pope to undermine the Synod of the family by changing the agreed position of the Synod to be closer to his own thoughts, and to refuse to discuss the conflicts of his thoughts with the greater understanding of the church, looks like (forgive me) weak leadership.

This to me reflects what has gone wrong more generally in the west where each issue becomes an emotional one rather than a logical one. People who disagree are scared, or angry or rigid etc. instead of having valid points that need to be answered.

It is in many ways a concentration on emotional examples such as his divorced sister not being in good standing instead of a logical and systematic idea which reflect the coherence of Christian thought.

So if people who divorce are suddenly in good standing with the church then apart from contradicting the words of Jesus, what is to stop a husband dumping his wife and children for a younger new wife and to expect to be in good standing with the church and not be in serious sin. What does the church tell the abandoned wife and kids? Do they say that the church has no problems with the husbands/fathers actions?

I think logically and systematically this would be the position under Francis’ views and it seems Francis’ idea is not to discuss this but refer to people who are not on board as rigid and unmerciful which I have mentioned is a very bad look and repeating the incoherence of the Progressives in secular life.

I am very much on Francis’ side in trying to find ways to be merciful and to be inclusive to a wide range of good people but I see it as a mistake to think in narrow, emotional terms that ignore such important concepts as sin.

It is a further mistake to offer indirect but biting condemnations of good people who have valid points and refuse to dialogue with them.

God bless Francis and his church.

I personally believe the Church’s first and foremost goal is the salvation of souls, and that rules and regulations are of secondary concern.

I also believe that Pope Benedict did something far worst than offering communion to remarried and repenting couples when he re-wrote John 12:25 without any regard for using references that agree with his reinterpretation (and there are several passages of scripture that supported John 12:25 as it’s taken literally). How can anybody reinterpret the Word of Christ so rashly? If there are perceived errors in the bible, why should we believe any of the parts that we disagree with?

 

[DanielStDominic]

They may perceive a Church that is changing her teachings.

I believe that God’s grace will always open hearts, regardless of the static in the transmission. God is permitting the current state of affairs for His own good purposes, and He certainly will not permit those circumstances to interfere with His salvific work.

We need to regain a reliance on God’s grace and His providence, rather than on the strength and personality and actions of men and the messages they send. In fact, I think, after the awesome papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, that we are being purged from a certain cult of personality and are being encouraged to trust in Him with greater abandon.