National Catholic Register unwittingly spills the beans on why Benedict is still Pope: “Does one stay pope forever?”

“Does one stay pope forever? In practice, Benedict XVI distinguished between the munus and the officium, that is, between the function and the exercise of the function. Once elected pope, he remains pope forever. In a certain sense, Benedict XVI equated the election as pope with a further episcopal ordination. German theologian Karl Rahner, who emphasized that the power of order and the power of jurisdiction were indissociable, had come to consider the primacy conferred with the election as pope as the highest degree of the sacrament of orders. According to this criterion, the beginning of the pope’s Petrine ministry would represent a unique ordination.”

Once elected pope, he remains pope forever.

Listen up. It is extremely important to get this straight. Benedict is still pope, but NOT because that statement is true. Benedict is still pope because that statement is FALSE, but he thinks it is true.

This is error. Substantial Error. Pope Benedict doesn’t think it possible to really, truly resign. What he intended to resign was only the exercise of the function, the active governance, the ‘doing’ – not the ‘being.’ Which means his entire resignation was invalid, per the Substantial Error clause of Canon 188. It’s plain as day. Which means the conclave convoked by the Cardinals in March 2013 was invalid, and could only produce an antipope. The fact that Antipope Bergoglio is a raging heretic who obviously does not have the protection of the Petrine Promises is merely a confirming proofset of his invalid election. Bergoglio is, in fact, the easiest antipope to spot in the entire history of Church and Her 30 something antipopes in 2000 years.

Full NCRegister article HERE.

Commentary from Miss B. HERE.

Cardinal Burke, call your office.

14 thoughts on “National Catholic Register unwittingly spills the beans on why Benedict is still Pope: “Does one stay pope forever?””

  1. Dr Marshall must need some clicks and comments, lets post a “was Abp Lefebvre right?” video. Yawn, boring tradinc.

  2. Silly Catholics…
    If Merriam Webster can change the definition of ‘female’ to embrace people who are not female…
    Then certainly the Pope can change the Papacy to include people who aren’t Popes, much less Catholic…
    And Councils can change the Church to include non-churches are other religions because the Church can’t be perfect without them, and therefore a new Mass was needed to reflect that!
    Embrace the New Normal! Babel did!

  3. No, Mark, no.
    That Karl Rahner said one thing does not give you the right to assume his saying to be Pope Benedict XVI’s intent. That would be hear think which is akin to hearsay.
    Benedict is Pope. Leave it at that and quit trying to get into the man’s head. Cease. Desist. Do you not see how your insistence on knowing Pope Benedict’s intent leads souls to disregard the papacy itself?.

    1. I’m not trying to get into his head. I see what I see with my naked eye. I see, in so very many ways, that he believes he remains in some way papal. He never left, he wears white, he made up a new title with “pope” in it, he expects to be addressed as His Holiness… these aren’t the acts of a really truly totally retired pope.

      1. God bless you for your courage, Mark! What we are witnessing, even from those like Burke, is what Father Gruner called “diabolical disorientation” and that result is “the blind are leading the blind”. “Getting in someone’s head” is something we do not have to do; Ratzinger has done it for us and if substantial error could not be subjectively demonstrated, Canon Law 188 would not mention it. Have a blessed week, dear brother. There are no loopholes in truth; keep fighting for the rock of Peter.

  4. Having bergoglio as “pope”, and having such clear cut simple arguments that he is an antipope presented, and such blatant examples of his misbehaviour (pachamama…) and not having a single Bishop say anything, even Archbishop Vigano won’t say he is an antipope… It’s really f’ing hard. They won’t even address the arguments that are being made.
    If someone like Cardinal Burke, or Archbishop Cordileone in SF, or any other “good and conservative” member of the hierarchy made a video presentation which ended with, “… and that is why Francis is the legitimate Pope, and Ms. Barnhardt is wrong and needs to be quiet.” I would appreciate that, and would encourage Ms. Barnhardt either address the arguments made, or be quiet.
    We’re not getting anything like that…
    If I were Orthodox, I’d see right now as a Golden Opportunity (maybe once every 500 years…) to BLAST the Catholic Church to oblivion across huge swaths of America.
    If I were Orthodox, I’d tell my own bishop: “Washington DC’s Cardinal is outlawing the TLM, the Parishes that are losing it will have to close because they can’t keep the lights on without the money those Masses bring in. Savannah is losing the TLM on orders from Rome itself. There are a lot of unhappy Catholics who have been praying FOR bergoglio for years, and are getting slapped in the face for their prayers. Look at how fast the Latin Mass grew, there’s a definite need and the Catholic Church is spitting on their own people! We need to get into those two cities, (and other places) and start setting up Western Rite Orthodox Churches and work on missionary efforts!” Pray for Francis… That he converts to Orthodoxy!” Could be a motto to bring these unhappy Catholics in the door.”

  5. Vigil of Feast of St James & St Christopher
    Seventh Sunday Post Pentecost
    23 July, 2022 A. D.
    Dear Mark (and Ann),
    The statement encompassing Benedict’s belief, “Once elected pope, he remains pope forever,” is true in and of itself under the circumstances, namely, absent a valid resignation of the Petrine Munus, meaning the Office of the Papacy, or the Petrine Charge or Mandate. It is correct to say as you do that Benedict holds to this statement. But it is, with all due respect, incorrect to say as you also do that the statement itself is false.
    Because Pope Benedict did not resign the Munus, there was no valid resignation. Therefore, there is no error on Pope Benedict’s part. Rather, it was all carefully thought out and executed by Pope Benedict both in the wording of his Renunciation and in his actions ex post facto (many of which as you note indicate that he still considers himself Pope, and has considered himself Pope all along)….
    Another way of phrasing it is that Pope Benedict remains Pope forever absent a valid resignation. Everything you and we have witnessed about Pope Benedict truly indicates, as you say, that “he believes he remains in some way papal.”
    For example, “He never left [the Enclosure of St. Peter], he wears white, he made up a new title with ‘pope’ in it, he expects to be addressed as His Holiness . . . these aren’t the acts of a really truly totally retired pope.”
    True. H\This is because he retained and retains the Munus, the Petrine Office, Charge or Mandate.
    On my read, this was by design. Thus, Pope Benedict preserved the Petrine Office from the hands of the usurper despoiler, ensuring that all of the acts of the destroyer Antipope are canonically invalid. It is obvious to anyone with a Catholic sense that Bergoglio does not preach Christ, rather quite the contrary.
    Secondly, Pope Benedict’s purpose was, as is quite plain to see from the events of the past nine years, to flush out and reveal the level of depravity and criminality in the very heart of the Church: in the College of Cardinals, the prelates including bishops worldwide, and among the clergy. In a word, he gave the power to this cabal, and it reveled itself. Thus, we have seen exposed Bergoglio, and his McCarrickan Party, which is none other than the criminal clerical Homosexual Network Strangling the Church.
    For this we are much in Pope Benedict’s debt, a debt we would do well to acknowledge, rather than criticize him for an “error” that he never made. You vastly underestimate the man. We should also thank him for freeing the Old Latin Mass with his glorious Summorum Pontificum, which states eloquently and very clearly that the Old Latin Mass may never be abolished, and that what all prior Catholic generations held sacred, we hold sacred too, echoing Pope Pius V’s Quo Primum in 1570 A, D. granting in perpetuity the right to offer the Tridentine Mass.
    And of course we should pray for Pope Benedict, much and hard. He is as you correctly ackowledge, our Pope, he is swimming in deep waters, and his strength is ebbing. Long Live the Pope! Long Live Benedict the Sixteenth.
    C. P. Benischek

    1. Amen.
      As Cardinal Ratzinger, if not earlier, Pope Benedict XVI had seen the full Third Secret of Fatima, so he had clear warning and plenty of years to devise a faux resignation or renunciation to enable a faux Pope and faux Catholic hierarchy to be revealed.
      One thing that really perplexes me, is why SSPX Priests not only recognise Bergoglio as Pope, but reserve far more criticism for Pope Benedict XVI and his heretical acts (especially Assisi) than for Bergoglio and his.

  6. Speaking of Trad Inc and Catholic media… Mark, could you please pass on the following link to Ann Barnhardt?
    I think you will be interested in it as well. It basically exposes some of the dirt and egos and diabolical narcissism that goes on behind the scenes of the right/conservative media. It is all definitely one side of a story, but is pretty insightful, and I imagine that the Catholic media has a level of similar dysfunction amongst its notables.
    A lot of it lines up very well with what Ann Barnhardt has been warning about for a long time regarding these kinds of people. So these are living examples of what Ann usually tries to explain with more discreet examples. The sad thing is that many people follow them with good intentions, and while they do arguably do a lot of good and have human failings like everyone, it is important to understand how many things can go so very wrong when doing the right thing once self-preservation and selfish interests are at stake, or simply trying to work around a habit of lying and dishonesty by going to lengths to cover up one’s mistakes or cowardice at the cost of others.
    It explains so much and while watching it I recall a lot of what Ann has been saying and the fact that despite what the mainstream Catholic media says, as well as the alternatives, behind the scenes they likely ALL KNOW what is really going on…
    There is likely also something in media organizations that tends to attract these kinds of characters, and a following of loyalist adherents that believe every contradictory thing they might say, which may have to do with the cult if celebrity and a starving desire for leadership to the point that they feel they have to protect the few we have, wrong or right…
    Please give it a watch (it’s long, but interesting), and for some reason I feel that Ann willhave much to say about its contents, and it will probably have some insight and warning for us regarding things within our own Catholic sphere.

  7. P.S. – Mark, the ‘ .:8 ‘ needs to be part of the link url for it to work.
    I believe Lauren Southern is Catholic, and she also made a very good documentary last year exposing the hoax about the native mass grave claims in Canada, that now has Francis over here this week doing another apology tour.
    Maybe Ann should podcast with her about that and the other stuff like with Nurse Claire? Just an idea…

  8. Paul says, “One thing that really perplexes me, is why SSPX Priests not only recognise Bergoglio as Pope, but reserve far more criticism for Pope Benedict XVI and his heretical acts (especially Assisi) than for Bergoglio and his.’
    Does the SSPX still criticize B16? They just happened to change their stance on the validity of episcopal consecrations in 2005, the year Benedict became pope. Before that, SSPX believed as the sedes do that the new rite episcopal consecrations were invalid. Ratzinger was consecrated bishop in the new rite. Somethin ain’t right here.
    And to refer to Benedict’s heretical acts, (especially Assisi) so nonchalantly is another indication somethin ain’t right here. Since when is a heretic capable of being pope? Hint: he’s not. A heretic, ipso facto is not Catholic and looses his office. This BiP position is far more dangerous than Bergoglio. Benedict is the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing, where as Bergoglio is an obvious wolf. Benedict is not a hero, he’s a modernist heretic through and through.

  9. I considered putting the phrase “heretical acts” in quotes, but this was not the precise phrase I heard from the only two SSPX Priests who I have spoken to on the matter. I cannot remember the precise phrases as my last conversations with them were in late 2019 and early 2020. I have not had any opportunity to meet SSPX Priests since then.
    I have neither read transcripts not watched videos of the Assisi gatherings of 1986, 2002 and 2011.
    I have read at least a handful of Catholic criticisms of them, including this one:
    St Peter made at least one scandalous, sinful error while Pope and was publicly rebuked by St Paul for it – Galatians 2:11-14 …
    I do not recall any Catholic theologian doubting the validity of St Peter’s Papacy due to that scandalous, sinful error – even for the time that St Peter fell into it.
    I would be interested to know where Sedeprivationists and Sedevacantists (as it is not clear to me which you are, using the term “sedes”) stand on:
    1. need for visibility of Catholic Church, including visible Vicar of Christ on earth
    2. permissible duration of “empty seat” until Papacy is declared obsolete (in another two months and nine days, it will be 64 years since Pope Pius XII died – already two generous generations)
    3. Popes prophecies of St Malachy – which seem to have been accurate up to Pope Benedict XVI

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.