Today Pope Francis has been Pope one day longer than his predecessor, and the Pope Emeritus is still with us. The health excuse for the resignation seems completely phony now. Of course we will probably be long dead by the time the truth comes out. The laity are simply expected to trust the clergy. It would be helpful of course if the higher ups among the clergy would act in a manner that engenders trust rather than intense suspicion that we are being fed a steady diet of congealed mendacity.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1361401530352508930
“.PopeWatch: Milestone”. Yes, also millstone.
Pope Emeritus, no doubt said a handful of things which pushed him out. It’s our loss, we weren’t able to enjoy his deep knowledge of the Faith. Instead we’ve had 8 years of sound bites.
I still believe there is a significant homosexual scandal lurking, probably concerning Pope St. JPII, something that Benedict thought would so ruin JPIIs reputation it would shatter the enthusiasm of The JPII Generation for the Church-possibly causing an exodus from the clergy or seminaries, which is in difficult shape in The West.
.
Possibly the scandal involves Benedict.
.
I am not sure if that scandal has already been uncovered–McCarrick, money laundering, etc.
Regarding DHJ’s comment above, even if there were a homosexual scandal lurking in the lives of either JP II or B XVI, we have to learn to forgive and focus on the good those two men did. Recently the Protestant Evangelical outfit RZIM came out with a report on Ravi Zacharias’ many sexual indiscretions with and sex abuses of massage therapists. Really very bad. But his apologetics work (albeit quite Protestant) was actually pretty good. It’s sad his work is now tainted and stained with his inability to control his genitals. I am reminded King David had a similar issue. The point is: we got to keep our eyes on Jesus. There’s an old saying in AA: principles before personalities. That applies here. Even if it was credibly revealed that one or both of the previous Pontiffs either concealed homosexual abuse or worse committed it themselves, we must remember that they are men. I don’t have a better answer than that. Yes, I would be disgusted and horrified. But my former submarine sailor life with paid girls in every port of call and free-flowing booze in every bar is really no example of Christian morality. Again (and again and again) I recommend (whether you’re an AA’er or not) the text from the bottom of page 68 through the middle of page 70 here:
https://www.aa.org/assets/en_US/en_bigbook_chapt5.pdf
On what evidence could anyone claim a homosexual scandal involving JP2? I believe we call this calumny.
King David and King Solomon
Led merry, merry lives,
With many, many lady friends
And many, many wives;
But when old age crept over them,
With many, many qualms,
King Solomon wrote the Proverbs
And King David wrote the Psalms.
– James Ball Naylor
Ken:
I’m with you and for pragmatic reasons: given the hatred of the Catholic left for people like JPII and Benedict any hint of that kind of scandal would have been aired years ago. I think the solution is in plain sight: Ratzinger begged JPII to let him retire in the 1990’s. My dad is 85 and at a certain age you just give out and can’t take your usual routine anymore. The ol’ bod won’t let you and after a while the mind (however strong) can’t persuade.
One thing that we can’t get away from is that bad eggs were promoted during the post-Vatican II era. The bad eggs have been the source of much that is wrong with the Church today. We need to learn from our mistakes if anything is to improve.
“On what evidence could anyone claim a homosexual scandal involving JP2?”
.
Has no one heard of Uncle Ted McCarrick, Father Maciel, and The Legion of Christ? There is already scandal involving JPII and unsavory people.
.
We’ve had the current pontiff for 8 years?
Why, it only seems three times as long.
Has no one heard of Uncle Ted McCarrick, Father Maciel, and The Legion of Christ? There is already scandal involving JPII and unsavory people.
Those are scandals in the Church. That they occurred during a span of years doesn’t necessarily implicate the Pope.
McCarrick is known to have had a private audience with John Paul in 2000 and would have been present in the room with the Pope on a couple of papal tours, about four ad limina visits, and a couple of consistories. He was a member of one particular pontifical commission (since dissolved), but was not the president of the commission. I doubt John Paul met McCarrick more than 10x. The Pope was indulgent of Maciel and gave him the benefit of the doubt; I don’t see as how we can figure he was acting in bad fairth.
If someone had hard evidence of a sex scandal involving popes who spoke so strongly in support of the Church’s teaching in this area, that evidence would not be held back. It would be too much in the interest of change-agents.
I am willing to give a pass to JPII on a few things, but he insisted on installing McCarrick over vociferous objections from many people, including a delegation that took its concerns to Rome. But Ted made a plea in person, and it was all good.
And then there was a certain Argentine Jesuit he made bishop over the objections of no less than Hans Peter Kolvenbach, head of the Jesuit Order.
It is clear that his judgment in personnel matters will wrack the Church for generations, thanks to the latter debacle.
Why has the Church always had so many reformer saints? Because she’s always been reeling from personnel problems. The Franciscans were splintering while St. Francis was still alive. There’s a whole heresy (Donatism) about what to do with priests who deny the Faith. The Church herself is perfect, but there’s been no period of history that could stand up to the test of perfection.
Pope Emeritus is a title created for the first time in history, 2/28/2013. Not a resignation. A retirement. Remain as retired Pope. Emeritus Pope “safely forever within the enclosure of St Peter”.
Of all the innovations this strange innovation, title and relationship has pride of place – first.
Where does it come from? (Shrug) who knows”. It just is.
First we accepted Emeritus.
Then we accepted unanswered Dubia.
Then irregular Amoris Latetia love.
Then support for sexual deviancy; its logic and language.
Then CCP approved Bishops polluting the apostolic line (who persecute actual Catholic brothers and sisters).
Then ecumenical support for other religions’ gods and beliefs.
Then a new pachamama god – with a satanic installation ceremony in the Vatican and Roman churches.
Then the almighty Covid god installed in every Catholic Church in the world with power over our Lord, shutting out the Faithful from our God and His Sacraments. Darkness.
But ….. Emeritus Pope. That, and our acceptance of it; our participation in it, was the evil seed that birthed all that followed. It will never be repaired until our Papacy is restored to that intended by Our Lord Jesus Christ: Peter until death or abdication. All rests upon the Rock as God ordained the Rock and in no other way.
Retirement; Emeritus is not an option provided for by God or the Church.
1: Die as Peter.
2: Flee the burden
That’s it, as recorded through all the drama and stories and the straight doctrinal line of our bi-millennial Church.
Dale Prince,
Your position is acceptible to me because it is based on facts not conjecture. It is not the same thing as flippantly opining that JP2 has some homosexual skeletons hiding in his closet. JP2 made some bad choices with appointments, but there has never been any evidence that he was a member of the lavender Mafia.
There have been hints about Benedict XVI ‘s brother or his chaplain. The brother rumor may have to do with his membership in Hitler Youth or something like that. Remember how vicious the rumors were about Pius XII and the Jews. When in actuality he was instrumental in saving many. In fact Head or Senior Rabbi of Rome converted to Catholicism after WWII. The Dark Side wants to destroy good people with false accusations. I believe that JPII destroyed or ordered his correspondence destroyed after his death. Perhaps because he knew that his writings would be misconstrued.
If I remember correctly, JPII’s secretary decided NOT to burn his papers.
The brother rumor may have to do with his membership in Hitler Youth or something like that.
If I’m not mistaken, it was after 1936 all but mandatory to enter the Hitler Youth at age 14. I don’t think you’re going to locate any scandals from that.
It may have to do with this:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/01/children-abused-in-choir-led-by-ex-pope-s-brother-investigator-says.html
George Ratzinger died last year at 96.
“In my eyes, there are two possible Benedicts, and History will help us ascertain who was the real one: weak Benedict and coward Benedict.
Weak Benedict is the Benedict we have followed in the news: no enforcement of Summorum Pontificum, bad appointments to Cardinal, worse appointments to Bishop, a general atmosphere of V II orthodoxy observed in word as he allowed the same V II orthodoxy to be undermined in fact. … Weak Benedict resigned, in good faith, because he felt he was too weak to carry on the job. Weak Benedict thought that his successor would have a stronger and more effective hand. Weak Benedict was very naive, a remarkable trait in so intelligent and perceptive a man.
Coward Benedict, if such a one he was, simply fled before the wolves. Either he caved to personal threats (an extremely grave fault in a Pope), or he was too weak to keep fighting the “deep Vatican”, or – if you are one of those who love conspiracy theories – he chose to resign to avoid some scandal being revealed, as if scandals were something new to the Church or threatening to Her.
In charity, I always assumed that weak Benedict is the real one, and coward Benedict is a fantasy of the usual conspiracy troops.”
– Mundabor
https://mundabor.wordpress.com/2021/02/12/a-tale-of-two-benedicts/
“There is already scandal involving JPII and unsavory people.”
Consider that St JPII did not take some abuse allegations seriously because of his experience in Poland, where communist authorities would try to smear priests to weaken the church’s political strength. This has been said repeatedly. So he is guilty of poor judgement, which is not a sin. I’d prefer to be on that side than the side that pushes unfounded rumours. He became St JPII after all. We might as well go through every Sainted person and rip apart their lives looking for indiscretions and scandal.
QUOTERMEISTER:
Mundabir is not correct in his premise. Benedict did not resign. He retired. That is why he retained the title Pope Emeritus and “remains safely and forever within the enclosure of St Peter”.
And from that false premise Mundabor goes down many Mundabor style rabbit holes. All of it is false because he accepts the equivalence of retired Emeritus Popes who remain … with abdicated former Popes who fled .
There have been Popes who abdicated. St Peter was almost one of them.
There has never been a retired Emeritus who remains.
The false definition is the Cornerstone of all current error.