Should Pope Benedict Resign?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lemonbeam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I sometimes wonder if the way that many Catholics speak in favor of the pope doesn’t hurt more than help. I’m referring to some of the pious language that we use. I agree that he is an excellent theologian. I agree that he appears to be a very holy man. And I firmly agree that the Church has recovered from other crises in the past.

But I wonder if just simply stating facts to the antagonist would be better. Let’s say that he may have made a mistake while Archbishop of Munich; that has yet to be proven.

Second, if he made a mistake by taking in this priest, does that disqualify him for this job? If a mistake disqualifies someone for this job, we would never have any pope. Who has not made prudential mistakes in their lives? Please raise your hands?

You ask a person to retire or resign from a post that when they cannot fulfill the obligations of the post. Can someone prove that Benedict XVI cannot fulfill his obligations as pope? If so, there is a procedure for this. Let that person present his case to the College of Cardinals. But the only reason that you can ask a person to resign from a job is because he can no longer fulfill the duties. So far, we have not seen this. The scandals do not seem to impair his functioning or his effectiveness.

These are the kind of logical arguments that those ask for his resignation must answer. Prove that he can’t do the job. Don’t tell me that only saints can be popes, because that is rare. Also, prove that here was a mistake in the first place and that there was malice intent. In moral law, a mistake carries culpability only if the intent was malicious.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
The mistakes the Pope may have made in the past before he became the Supreme Pontiff are irrelevant. He became a different man when he stepped into Peter’s shoes. The Holy Spirit chose him, and the Holy Spirit guides him.

As Catholics, we should not be having this conversation. Instead, we should defend the Pope and humbly submit to his will.
 
Rascalking said:
It may not be. However, I think the people “calling” for the Pope’s resignation mean well. That’s not enough (it seldom is) but they **have every right to be heard, **as do people with your opinon.
Click to expand...
The bold is mine.

I’m not so sure about that and I say that in all honesty. The laws of the Church are very different from those of a democracy. There is a law in the canons that says that there is no right over the right of the pope. The question for canonists would be, is giving this crowd an audience giving them a right over the right of the pope to say, “I don’t want to hear it.”

I’m in theology, not Church law. That’s a highly specialized field. But I do believe that there are some things in canon law to which we do not have a right and this may be one of them. I don’t think that we have a right to call for the resignation of a pope. Just as we don’t have the right to select him. That could be interpreted as giving the popular voice the authorityto fire a pope.

I would ask a canon lawyer if these people have a righ to be heard, from the perspective of canon law, not the laws of the USA.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
God called HH B16 to the Papacy. When God wants him gone, HE will call him from life. That is HIS concern alone, and not that of a newspaper in America, nor of a groundswell of sinners.

Why doesn’t everybody just set aside this issue and work off their Purgatory???

ICXC NIKA.
 
god called hh b16 to the papacy. When god wants him gone, he will call him from life. That is his concern alone, and not that of a newspaper in america, nor of a groundswell of sinners.
Click to expand...
exactly!
 
He needs to lay out the facts. If he failed in matters of faith & morals while serving the Church … Yes, he should resign.

He cannot pass judgment on others, if he has same guilt.
 
Pope Benedict is the best Pope for this time. He is the most likely to start cracking heads 😃
 
Dempsey1919 said:
The mistakes the Pope may have made in the past before he became the Supreme Pontiff are irrelevant. He became a different man when he stepped into Peter’s shoes. The Holy Spirit chose him, and the Holy Spirit guides him.

As Catholics, we should not be having this conversation. Instead, we should defend the Pope and humbly submit to his will.
Click to expand...
I agree that the mistakes of the past do not always affect what we do today. But what I’m suggesting is that those who defend the pope change the language. Use the same secular logic as the accusers. The accusers are not interested in hearing about the Holy Spirit and the Chair of Peter. That to them is religious babble. They need to hear their own logic being used.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JReducation said:
I sometimes wonder if the way that many Catholics speak in favor of the pope doesn’t hurt more than help. I’m referring to some of the pious language that we use. I agree that he is an excellent theologian. I agree that he appears to be a very holy man. And I firmly agree that the Church has recovered from other crises in the past.
Click to expand...
We are in a spiritual battle. This situation needs to be examined in that light.

Being dragged down into the muck of the details of this issue serves only to risk the shipwreck of souls who get stuck in that muck (I was a poet and didn’t knowit)

The best thing for Catholics to do is to offer prayers and penance for the Church, her ministers (both those who are innocent and and for those who have violated their office), and the innocent that have been harmed and the bystanders who are at risk to become collateral damage.
 
My worry if he resigns is some of faith will lose confidence … and stop going to mass or sending children to Catholic Schools.

satan knows if he can ‘strike’ the shepherd, the sheep will be scattered. he is always trying to take down our popes and priests.
 
lemonbeam said:
A lot of people are saying Pope Benedict should resign! What are your opinions on this? I’ve just read a story about German people having little faith left in this Pope.

It strikes me that the German people have very little faith left period. They are very similar to the French and the Dutch, who are mainly secular. Having said that, I am very anxious that the Holy Father and the Vatican get this mess cleaned up, heads need to roll. The process in place to de-frock pervert and heretic priests takes far too long. Fair inquiry and then swift justice is what is needed. An Inquisition, perhaps?
Click to expand...
 
brb3 said:
He needs to lay out the facts. If he failed in matters of faith & morals while serving the Church … Yes, he should resign.

He cannot pass judgment on others, if he has same guilt.
Click to expand...
This is not true. Look at Peter. Three times he denied the Lord and yet he was chosent to preach, teach and govern those who did the same thing as he did.

There is not rule that a man coming to the papacy must be impeccable. The rule is that he must be selected by the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit selected him and he obeyed by accepting the election, he now has a moral duty to see it through to the end, unless he can no longer do the job. As long as he can do the job, he must obey, because no one forced him to accept the electioin. Once he accepts it, he must obey the Will of God and take care of the Church.

Jesus never told Peter that he would be sinless or that he would suddenly become a wise an. Peter was not the sharpest tool in the shed. But Jesus knew why he chose him and he gave him the command to feed his sheep. That is the role of a pope, to be the Good Shepherd.

As to laying out the facts, I always get the impression that people mean, “He needs to say what we want to hear.” If he has already said, “I knew nothing about this.” Why can’t that be accepted as a fact?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
I agree that the mistakes of the past do not always affect what we do today. But what I’m suggesting is that those who defend the pope change the language. Use the same secular logic as the accusers. The accusers are not interested in hearing about the Holy Spirit and the Chair of Peter. That to them is religious babble. They need to hear their own logic being used.
Click to expand...
The Pope is a religious figure and can only be defended in a religious manner. The Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church. Those who defend him use Catholic language and Catholic logic. Non-Catholics do not understand the Pope or the Papacy, and they have no right to demand that the Sovereign Pontiff resign.

The people who say our arguments are “religious babble” are the same people who say that there is no God. There is no way to defend the Pope when speaking to these people. They are on a totally different wave-length.
 
Lutheranteach said:
Read what I wrote. I never called for his resignation. I gave a scenario where it may be a necessity — or for the best. As for your first paragraph. I totally disagree as you would expect.
Click to expand...
However, you are writing as a member of a Protestant ecclesial community that does not recognize the Church as the True Church nor the authority of the Holy Father. Thus, with all due respect, your opinion is not formed with an understanding of the Church.

This is a very bad thread which should be closed. People with little to no understanding of the Church and with very little to no regard (let alone, respect) for Pope Benedict XVI are opining on things that they do not, as I read the posts, quite understand. Such a thread does no one any good and is an embarassment for these forums.
 
This is a very bad thread which should be closed. People with little to no understanding of the Church and with very little to no regard (let alone, respect) for Pope Benedict XVI are opining on things that they do not, as I read the posts, quite understand. Such a thread does no one any good and is an embarassment for these forums.
Click to expand...
👍 I agree!
 
Dempsey1919 said:
The Pope is a religious figure and can only be defended in a religious manner. The Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church. Those who defend him use Catholic language and Catholic logic. Non-Catholics do not understand the Pope or the Papacy, and they have no right to demand that the Sovereign Pontiff resign.

The people who say our arguments are “religious babble” are the same people who say that there is no God. There is no way to defend the Pope when speaking to these people. They are on a totally different wave-length.
Click to expand...
Here is my idea. By the way, I’m not a lawyer.

They say: Cardinal Ratzinger committed a crime.
We say: The burden of proof is on the accuser. Prove it.

They say: The pope should resign because of the sex scandals.
We say: Do the sex scandals impair his job as pope? Prove it. No head of state is ever asked to resign unless he can’t do his job.

They say: The pope has to be held to a higher moral standard.
We say: There is no argument there. But what has he done that is immoral and can you prove it? In the world of law that we follow in the west, you are innocent until proven guilty.

They say: The pope is not above the law.
We say: Everyone is subject to the law. You must still prove that he violated the law. Even if you could, you now have an additional problem, he no longer lives in Germany. Are you suggesting that the Germans invade the Vatican to bring the pope back to stand trial in Germany?

This is the logic that these people understand. From what I see coming out of the Vatican, that’s what they are using. Thy are taking the position that they have told the truth and if someone does not beleive what they have said, they have to prove it, not just make assumptions. We don’t hear Cardinal Bertoli using theological language on this matter. He uses logic.

That’s what I’m getting at.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
This is the logic that these people understand. From what I see coming out of the Vatican, that’s what they are using. Thy are taking the position that they have told the truth and if someone does not beleive what they have said, they have to prove it, not just make assumptions. We don’t hear Cardinal Bertoli using theological language on this matter. He uses logic.
Click to expand...
Now that you have explained what you mean, I agree wholeheartedly. What you have been saying is the same as what Our Lord said in Matthew 10:16:

Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves.

We must be wise and beat them at their own game. We must defend the Pope!
 
dnu said:
I don’t know if I would say “plumb” assignment.

He went from being an American Cardinal to a glorified tour guide at the Vatican. If thats not a slap in the face I don’t know what is.
Click to expand...
After his resignation, John Paul appointed Law to a post in Rome, putting him in charge of the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore, with the title of Archpriest. He is also a member of the Congregations for the Oriental Churches, the Clergy, Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, Evangelisation of Peoples, Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, Catholic Education, Bishops as well as the Pontifical Council for the Family.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Francis_Law
 
Dempsey1919 said:
Now that you have explained what you mean, I agree wholeheartedly. What you have been saying is the same as what Our Lord said in Matthew 10:16:

Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves.

We must be wise and beat them at their own game. We must defend the Pope!
Click to expand...
I agree that we have to defend the pope. They say that the pope is not above the law. I say that the law has to be applied to all equally. Are they doing this? No. Therefore, until they decide to apply the law equally, they are breaking the law that they hold so highly.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top