I really liked this article, and although I disagree with your opinion that the Catholic Anglosphere is as vulnerable to gaslighting as the Americans, I do applaud your synopsis of Cionci’s thesis.
The book makes a solid argument point by point, in sufficient detail and depth to satisfy the reader who has a solid understanding of the Catholic faith, and has retained the full use of reason.
However, it does not provide a satisfactory answer in its conclusion as to what this deliberately false resignation intended to achieve.
Why would Pope Benedict XVI deliberately create a false resignation, living on as the actual Pope secretly but in plain view?
And in a Vatican that would be occupied by a man elected to the office in his place by a Conclave that would have been called (or mis-called) under a false pretext?
And in addition to this subject matter of the false resignation and the unclear intention, there is also the question of the nature of the form. Was this an action formed by faith, or was it something other?
Was this action formed by faithlessness?
Did Pope Benedict XVI live his remaining life in a state of true humility, penitential suffering and prayer as a result of this action, formed by faith?
Cionci covers it far better then I do, and I only give the very gist of the beginning of his argument, I would reccomend reading the book. But there are indeed a lot of unanswered questions. (In regards to your first comment, I am of course not speaking of all american conservative Catholics, im talking about the lifestyle grifters who dominate the internet).
Thank you very much for your reply. I’m going to get a copy of the book for myself. I have a colleague that can help me with the Italian translation. Other than your article here, what I found in English was obviously deficient. With my own copy in the original language and a trustworthy translation resource, I have a feeling that the answers to my questions will come easier.
Thank you also for sharing the videos from the author. I will definitely get right into them.
All joking aside, there was a time when I could converse competently in five languages, and I could read Latin, French and high German fluently.
My Italian used to be passable, and my reading comprehension was very good, but I have been losing it due to lack of use, and in this day and age — especially at my age — I can’t afford such negligence.
I don’t have any use for French much anymore (who does?), and I have no plans to ever visit Germany again.
Italy however is at the heart of so many things, with so much history and, for all of us, so much that is directly changing the course of our future.
Your article has been a timely reminder that while it is impossible for me to be as vulnerable to gaslighting as my American friends and relatives, I can get blindsided by lack of understanding due to my own language comprehension issues.
I’ve seen Edmund Mazza interviewed on LifeSite News at least once, maybe also by Taylor Marshall. So there are corners in the US aware of the “substantial error” thesis. So far, though, it’s only been laity saying it, not any clergy, and certainly no one in the hierarchy.
I understand caring about this more while Benedict was still alive but what are the implications now that he's dead and the majority of cardinals in the next conclave will have been appointed by Francis?
Also regarding the divide between American and European Catholics my impression is that America is the only place with a large conservative faction that's still aligned with the mainstream hierarchy, although Francis is pushing many into the genuine trad camp. In Europe seems like you're either a hardcore trad or a liberal.
A very compelling case, but I would temper it with the position of Dr. Robert Sungenis: That only a future pope can make a legally binding decision on the matter. I would not be surprised if this provided the bones of that decision. There is much we do not know.
Sorry pope head, i may have missed your posts (i am fairly new around here) about the impossible predicament Benedict found himself in when he became pope. Could you point me in the right direction for some further reading?
I would very much like to read about the circumstances surrounding Benedict's resignation. I don't know much about it and always assumed somebody had some komoromat on him.
I really liked this article, and although I disagree with your opinion that the Catholic Anglosphere is as vulnerable to gaslighting as the Americans, I do applaud your synopsis of Cionci’s thesis.
The book makes a solid argument point by point, in sufficient detail and depth to satisfy the reader who has a solid understanding of the Catholic faith, and has retained the full use of reason.
However, it does not provide a satisfactory answer in its conclusion as to what this deliberately false resignation intended to achieve.
Why would Pope Benedict XVI deliberately create a false resignation, living on as the actual Pope secretly but in plain view?
And in a Vatican that would be occupied by a man elected to the office in his place by a Conclave that would have been called (or mis-called) under a false pretext?
And in addition to this subject matter of the false resignation and the unclear intention, there is also the question of the nature of the form. Was this an action formed by faith, or was it something other?
Was this action formed by faithlessness?
Did Pope Benedict XVI live his remaining life in a state of true humility, penitential suffering and prayer as a result of this action, formed by faith?
Or ... ?
Cionci covers it far better then I do, and I only give the very gist of the beginning of his argument, I would reccomend reading the book. But there are indeed a lot of unanswered questions. (In regards to your first comment, I am of course not speaking of all american conservative Catholics, im talking about the lifestyle grifters who dominate the internet).
Thank you very much for your reply. I’m going to get a copy of the book for myself. I have a colleague that can help me with the Italian translation. Other than your article here, what I found in English was obviously deficient. With my own copy in the original language and a trustworthy translation resource, I have a feeling that the answers to my questions will come easier.
Thank you also for sharing the videos from the author. I will definitely get right into them.
There is an english translation!
Uh huh. Yup.
I’m getting my own copy in Italian anyway.
All joking aside, there was a time when I could converse competently in five languages, and I could read Latin, French and high German fluently.
My Italian used to be passable, and my reading comprehension was very good, but I have been losing it due to lack of use, and in this day and age — especially at my age — I can’t afford such negligence.
I don’t have any use for French much anymore (who does?), and I have no plans to ever visit Germany again.
Italy however is at the heart of so many things, with so much history and, for all of us, so much that is directly changing the course of our future.
Your article has been a timely reminder that while it is impossible for me to be as vulnerable to gaslighting as my American friends and relatives, I can get blindsided by lack of understanding due to my own language comprehension issues.
I’ve seen Edmund Mazza interviewed on LifeSite News at least once, maybe also by Taylor Marshall. So there are corners in the US aware of the “substantial error” thesis. So far, though, it’s only been laity saying it, not any clergy, and certainly no one in the hierarchy.
I understand caring about this more while Benedict was still alive but what are the implications now that he's dead and the majority of cardinals in the next conclave will have been appointed by Francis?
Also regarding the divide between American and European Catholics my impression is that America is the only place with a large conservative faction that's still aligned with the mainstream hierarchy, although Francis is pushing many into the genuine trad camp. In Europe seems like you're either a hardcore trad or a liberal.
A very compelling case, but I would temper it with the position of Dr. Robert Sungenis: That only a future pope can make a legally binding decision on the matter. I would not be surprised if this provided the bones of that decision. There is much we do not know.
Sorry pope head, i may have missed your posts (i am fairly new around here) about the impossible predicament Benedict found himself in when he became pope. Could you point me in the right direction for some further reading?
I would very much like to read about the circumstances surrounding Benedict's resignation. I don't know much about it and always assumed somebody had some komoromat on him.