(The headline is a direct quote from Cardinal Ratzinger as head of the CDF under JPII, in 1992. Not his thoughts from 1950, 1960, 1970… no. 1992. You will find the link, still active as of this morning, down below in this essay of mine from 2019. Trad Inc, tell me more how Pope Benedict XVI/Ratzinger never ever expressed this idea of a changeable Papacy, okay? This is the very thing that drew him into the Substantial Error of 11 Feb 2013 (likely under duress), where he cleared the way for his “successor” while still CLEARLY, OBVIOUSLY thinking himself remaining papal in some way. This is precisely why his resignation was invalid, and why we now are on our second consecutive antipope. -nvp ’25)
Thesis 14: In order to fulfill its specific mission, the Petrine ministry has assumed many different forms in the past and will continue to do so in the future
Because the people of God are on a pilgrimage, the pope must have the freedom to respond to new challenges, thereby revealing new facets of the Petrine ministry. We must be on guard, therefore, lest we too quickly identify contingent forms with what is dogmatically essential to the papal office. (Do you see here how the ministry is obviously distinct from the office?)
“The Petrine ministry…while preserving its substance as a divine institution, can find expressions in various ways according to the different circumstances of time and place.” -Cardinal Ratzinger (as Prefect of the CDF), Communionis Notio, 28 May 1992, P.18
Ratzinger admits that “without a doubt there have been misguided developments in both theology and practice where the primacy is concerned.” A particular way of exercising the primacy might well have been the pope’s duty for the Church’s welfare at one time, without its being so in the future. In the words of Hermann Pottmeyer, “the present juridical and organizational form of the office of Peter is neither the best imaginable nor the only possible realization.”
Seewald: “Do you think that the papacy will remain as it is?”
++Ratzinger: “In its core it will remain. In other words, a man is needed to be the successor of Peter and to bear a personal final authority that is supported collegially. Part of Christianity is a personalistic principle; it doesn’t get vaporized into anonymities but presents itself in the person of the priest, of the bishop, and the unity of the universal Church once again has a personal expression. This will remain, the magisterial responsibility for the unity of the Church, her faith, and her morals that was defined by Vatican I and II. Forms of exercise can change, they will certainly change, when hitherto separated communities enter into unity with the Pope. By the way, the present Pope’s (JPII) exercise of the pontificate—with the trips around the world—is completely different from that of Pius XII. What concrete variations emerge I neither can nor want to imagine. We can’t foresee now exactly how that will look.”
Cardinal Ratzinger, Salt of the Earth, Peter Seewald book-length interview, 1997, page 257
“I neither can nor want to imagine.” Oh man, how unknowingly prophetic is that? Then again, if you self-fulfill your own prophesy, is that cheating?
“Forms of exercise can change, they will certainly change”
He’s not exactly on the fence about it, is he?
Now let’s move to the following year, and another document written by Cardinal Ratzinger in his official role as Prefect of the CDF, The Primacy of the Successor of Peter in the Mystery of the Church, 18 November 1998:
At this moment in the Church’s life, the question of the primacy of Peter and of his Successors has exceptional importance as well as ecumenical significance. John Paul II has frequently spoken of this, particularly in the Encyclical Ut unum sint, in which he extended an invitation especially to pastors and theologians to “find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation”…
“The pilgrim Church, in its sacraments and institutions, which belong to this age, carries the mark of this world which is passing”.44 For this reason too, the immutable nature of the primacy of Peter’s Successor has historically been expressed in different forms of exercise appropriate to the situation of a pilgrim Church in this changing world…The Holy Spirit helps the Church to recognize this necessity, and the Roman Pontiff, by listening to the Spirit’s voice in the Churches, looks for the answer and offers it when and how he considers it appropriate.
Consequently, the nucleus of the doctrine of faith concerning the competencies of the primacy cannot be determined by looking for the least number of functions exercised historically. Therefore, the fact that a particular task has been carried out by the primacy in a certain era does not mean by itself that this task should necessarily be reserved always to the Roman Pontiff… (ahem, you mean like delegating the Governance role without relinquishing the Office, per Canon 131.1?)
In any case, it is essential to state that discerning whether the possible ways of exercising the Petrine ministry correspond to its nature is a discernment to be made in Ecclesia, i.e., with the assistance of the Holy Spirit and in fraternal dialogue between the Roman Pontiff and the other Bishops, according to the Church’s concrete needs. But, at the same time, it is clear that only the Pope (or the Pope with an Ecumenical Council) has, as the Successor of Peter, the authority and the competence to say the last word on the ways to exercise his pastoral ministry in the universal Church.
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger,Prefect, CDF, Primacy of the Successor of Peter in the Mystery of the Church (published in L’Osservatore Romano, Weekly Edition in English, 18 November 1998, page 5-6) HERE
But wait! There’s more:
It’s 2008 and Ratzinger is now Pope Benedict XVI. This collection of essays, in various forms, goes back to 1987. The 2008 edition was translated by our new friend, Archbishop Miller. Turn straight to page 38 to read Benedict waxing poetic about the idea of not one, not two, but THREE members in an expanded Petrine ministry. He literally uses the term “papal troika.”
Talk about shifting the Overton Window. How about having a book published after you’ve become pope, introducing the radical idea of a papal troika as being plausible, and then pulling back to the slightly less radical idea of a diarchy, making the latter seem positively moderate by comparison.
But remember, there is absolutely zero evidence that Pope Benedict ever once, even for a moment, considered the idea of altering the structure of the papacy, you stupid layperson.
Great summary, Mark.
I remember reading that passage from Salt of the Earth. I then as now have no idea why he was personally convinced that the office had to change, or how JP2 traveling was some vast departure from how Pius 12 served. Pius in fact did expose himself to bombs from the air.
But it’s clear that Ratzinger could not stop thinking about how to tinker with the office.
Classic head-in-clouds intellectual overreach, uncorrected by Reality.
He was just too smart for his own good! A victim, really.
I think everyone should read the book “Explaining Postmodernism”.
And I will try to demonstrate the German mind with a real life example.
Milli Vanilli was a fraudulent R and B group, produced by German producer Frank Farian. The singers were real professionals, hired by Farian, but the performers on film and TV were just that. Also hired by Farian.
We all know what happened. MV won the Grammy and they were found out.
Instead of being guilty, or ashamed, or apologizing, Farian said he had to commit the fraud because the actual singers were just too physically unattractive. In other words, this was a rational response to a situation that just happened, not something that he actually created.
Same as with a female Nazi concentration camp guard who has to spend time in a cell that she kept Jewish prisoners in. She talked about the humanity of her having to use a hole in the floor for a toilet.
Germans are narcissistic, psychopathic, and never take accountability for their actions. Even today their attitude isn’t that what they did to the Jews was wrong, it’s that the shame they had to endure from other lesser nations, which is every nation, is intolerable.
So, only the Germans (Luther, and on to Ratzinger, V2) could take a divine institution, and treat it like a cat does wirh a mouse it just caught. And there is no self awareness about what they’re doing. They are Supermen. They know all and can do all.
And I say this as a guy with German ancestry, and a German last name.
I said it over and over again, a loooong time ago, and never got a straight, cogent answer….’if this isn’t heresy…active, kinetic, material, FORMAL heresy…then what is?’
It’s a really, reeaalllly ugly thought to process, but by Christ’s divine protective promise to the legitimate successors of Peter, Benedict should have been prohibited from doing this…he might have still thought it (material), might have still held it in the recesses of his mind (material), but he could have never put it into motion (FORMAL).
Perhaps…just perhaps…Kono was right.`
OR (and?), perhaps, just perhaps, we are seeing the final and total fulfillment of last Isaiah 22, when the sure peg that had been placed by the Lord is removed (2022?…1958?). I never really had a glimmer of a hope of understanding that last line, till these, unspeakably dark days.
end time. I truly, TRULY can’t make sense out of any of this any other way.
I think people just don’t realize how UTTERLY BAD the situation we’re now in is. This is sui generis…and don’t anyone tell me, “oh, we’ve had had bad and anti-popes before…blah, blah, BLAH”
….we’ve never…NEVER…had what we’re staring down the barrel of now.
Be prepared, that’s all I can say…everyday…BE PREPARED.
The term Heresy is limited in scope; if must have as its object a denial of a formally defined Dogma of the Church. What he have here is error, Substantial Error, which nullified the resignation.
How is the error of synodality, which you claim to be a heresy (even though Pope Leo has explained that it doesn’t intend to subvert the hierarchy of the Church) different from this error of Papal synodality from Benedict? Christ instituted a singular office through Peter, not a collegiate office. Is this not clear in Pastor Aeternus and Lumen Gentium (if you accept V2)?
Because synodality as instituted by Bergoglio and continued under Prevost provides a role in Governance to the laity. Voting rights for the laity. Absolutely impossible, and a violation of at least three defined dogmas of the Church. Related is the placing of women religious at the head of Vatican congregations… also impossible. Only the ordained can hold offices of jurisdiction and governance.
Is not the freakin papacy, as Christ Himself defined and established it, NOT a formally defined dogma of the Church?…in its very essence and ontological reality?
This is no doubt error, but error as a subset of heresy..i.e., not every error is heresy, but every heresy is error. And if this doesnt rise to the level of heretical error ill eat ALL of my hats.
One has to be mightily gymnastically inclined to say otherwise ay this point.
seriously.
Susan, please provide the defined dogma that has been violated.
Then I guess the papacy as Christ established and defined it isn’t a dogma….who knew?
Well, that certainly opens up the possibilities then…doesn’t it?