Br. Alexis Bugnolo apparently disagrees with Ferrara that Catholics need to "Antipapacies can only be determined after the putative Pope in question is dead." He says that "the validity of a papal renunciation is determined by the law"
Q: Ann, I keep hearing that Antipapacies can only be determined after the putative Pope in question is dead. So why bother worrying about this now?
A: This contention is what is known at Fordham Law School as “making **** up out of whole cloth”. I believe it is a second year course.
Here is Christopher Ferrara, a vocal proponent of this madness, in the Remnant a while back:
Here, however, we encounter the question whether the Holy Ghost has allowed the Church to be afflicted for a time by a de facto antipope whose election cannot be contested and whose papacy must be presumed valid until such time as a successor Pope or Council declares otherwise. On that vexed issue, in my view, we can have nothing definitive to say, meaning nothing by which the Church as a whole could gain operative certitude and proceed accordingly. What is certain, however, is that this Pope must be opposed in his efforts to undermine the Faith. [https://www.barnhardt.biz/2022/05/03/qa-ann-i-keep-hearing-that-antipapacies-can-only-be-determined-after-the-putative-pope-in-question-is-dead-so-why-bother-worrying-about-this-now/]
vs.
Mary Parks
From the terrible Latin, to the canonical errors, to the false division of office from ministry, to the wearing white and giving the apostolic blessing, it is obvious that Benedict purposely did not resign the papacy. I think he faux-resigned on purpose, others think he meant to share the papacy, which would render the resignation invalid also. Makes no difference: he is still pope. That is my opinion, but it is not for me to declare. In any case, the conclave as a conclave was invalid because of the numerous breaches of JPII’s document governing it. Perhaps examining the conclave would be a starting point for the cardinals, if there are any brave ones left of those who were there, one that would bring them to question Benedict. Personally, I think this is a matter of prophecy and mystery, and it will not be resolved in the normal course of events.
-
Mary, the thing is, YOU do not have to declare it. It is true regardless of who declares it or does not declare it, because the validity of a papal renunciation is determined by the law itself, not by the acceptance or rejection of anyone. Here many Catholics get confused and are being gaslighted by the lavender mafia. Because it is one thing that a canonical act is or is not, or is or is not valid, its another thing that it is judged to be valid or not, to be or not. In the case of matrimonial vows, the Church puts their validity under its judgement. But in the Case of a papal resignation, the Church does not put this under anyone’s judgement, because a papal act is what it is, there is no one who can judge it to be other than it is. So when the Pope says I renounce the Ministery, those who say that means he renounced the Papacy ARE ARROGATING JUDGEMENT over the Pope, and not only err but sin mortally and merit eternal damnation, because the Pope can only be judged by God. However, though we must recognize that He did renounce the ministry, we do not need authority to know whether that is or is not a papal resignation. We have Canon 332 §2, which says it is not. And to say that is simply to reiterate what the law says. That is why those who say Pope Benedict XV is still the pope not only do not err, but they neither sin or arrogate judgement to themselves, while those who say he is not pope, do both, and thus must attack either the Law or those who uphold the law.
These are great ideas, Br. B and PopeAuntie! Here are a couple more ideas. Church Militant runs various surveys ( https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/NF87NZG ) that usually have a box marked ‘Other Suggestions’. I’ve use that space to recommend re-interviewing Bp Gracida specifically about BiP AND to request that they use their investigative journalism skills to investigate The Big Lie: BiP.
Also, when commenting in those comboxes that you listed I will ask the question, “Why? Why haven’t the people at this blog [insert name] investigated the evidence surrounding PPBXVI’s declaration of intent to renounce the Petrine Ministry but not the Papal Office?” I figure for moderated comments someone at the blog itself is reading that question.
Observations: I’ve noticed that people in comboxes are less desirous
of engaging in a conversation, are more and more conflicted about FiP
(while at the same time remaining entrenched in FiP), and that more and
more BiP comments are getting both ‘up’ and ‘down’ votes. [https://www.fromrome.info/2019/11/24/will-the-mafia-of-st-gallen-triumph/]
