Catholic Men Purporting to Lead: Please Mind the Maiden
A perennial lesson of the ages is that when men of a realm fall into gross dereliction, Our Lord sends holy women to remind them of who they are. Reminder alert!

But there isn't actually any forcing a pope out, is there? Even if a pope is threatened into resignation, it would be his own freely-willed act to give into the threat.

"A more precise translation of the Declaratio of Feb 11, 2013 shows that Pope Benedict did not intend to split the Papal Office. Neither did he abdicate the Papal Office, rather he announced his inability to “rightly administrate” or “administrate satisfactorily” two of the papal powers and thus he abdicated from using those powers. Abdicating the use of power is NOT the same as resigning the Papal Office. A pope who is imprisoned cannot use those powers although he still rightly has them since they belong to the office."

Islam_Is Islam says:
November 24, 2018 at 12:11 am

Great, Brother Alexis! Thank you. Your translation is similar to the one below except for the “could be vacant” phrase which seems rather important.



Dear Brothers,

I have convoked you to this Consistory not only on account of the three Canonizations,

but also to communicate to you a decision of great importance for the life of the Church.

After having examined my conscience again and again before God, I have arrived at the definite understanding that as my age advances my physical powers are no longer suitable for rightly administrating the Petrine office.



I am well aware that this office according to its spiritual essence must be executed not only by being active and by speaking [administering] but not less than by suffering and praying [sanctifying, atoning, supplicating]. However, in the world subject to the rapid changes of our time and shaken by questions of great consequence for the life of the Faith, indeed a certain vigor of body and soul is necessary for governing the Barque of St. Peter and for proclaiming the Gospel, which [vigor] has diminished in me in such a way that I should recognize my incapacity for administrating satisfactorily the ministry (management or active duties and teaching) committed to me. For this reason well aware of the seriousness of this act with full freedom I declare that I abdicate with regard to the ministry of the Bishop of Rome, Successor of St. Peter, entrusted to me through the hands of the Cardinals on the 19th day of April 2005 in such a way that from the 28th day of February 2013, at the hour 20:00, the See of Rome, the See of St. Peter could be vacant [provided/if the See of Peter be vacant] and that a Conclave would have to be convoked by these whose competence it is.



Dearest Brothers, I thank you most sincerely for all the love and labor with which you have carried the weight of my ministry with me and I ask pardon for all my failings. But now we confide the Holy Church of God to the care of Its Supreme Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ and implore His Mother Mary, in order that She may assist the Cardinal Fathers by her maternal goodness in electing a new Supreme Pontiff. As far as I am concerned, I by all means wish in the future to serve the Holy Church of God most sincerely by a life dedicated to prayer.



From the halls of the Vatican, the 10th day of the month of February 2013

The Editor says:

November 24, 2018 at 3:36 pm

There is no could be in the Latin where you put it. The subjunctive form of vacet is such because its in a subordinate clause of purpose, not because its in a condition or contrary to fact assertion.

Islam_Is Islam says:

November 25, 2018 at 4:55 am

Thank you for your explanation. I don’t mean to be argumentative; I am only trying to get to the bottom of Pope Benedict’s meaning and its implications. You mentioned the lack of subjunctive voice for competit to be a discrepancy. Would you please remark on the following as a possible explanation for the translation as “could be”? “Since the use of the subjunctive actually provides for a ‘condition’ based on Gildersleeve and Lodge, ‘provided the See of Peter be vacant . . .,’ which takes the burden off using the Subjunctive for ‘competit’ which, because it is in the Indicative Mood (may appear to be a discrepancy).” [More specifically,“Ita” and “sic”, although “usually antecedent to a consecutive ‘ut’, it may also be antecedent to a Final ‘ut’… when the design or wish intrudes … So not unfrequently when a restriction or condition is intended …” (Gildersleeve-Lodge Latin Grammar, P. 353.) This is what I believe Pope Benedict intended here in using “ita” with “vacet”. (The idea of condition, I firmly believe, is what Pope Benedict intended here in using “ita” with “vacet”.) “The infinitive clause becomes subjunctive by the principle of ‘Attraction of Mood’” (Gildersleeve-Lodge Latin Grammar, p. 424)] {From footnotes 11 and 12 of an earlier comment under The Validity of Pope Benedict XVI’s Resignation Must be Questioned posted on November 19th at From Rome}



Thank you again; you are the first to even allow a discussion of these fine points. It is a great relief.

The Editor says:

November 25, 2018 at 5:00 pm

Your citation of the Latin Grammar is inconclusive, because you have to give examples. In Ecclesiastical Latin ita ut introduces a subordinate clause of purpose. Its a grave error found in many modern Latin grammars in English to attempt to reread into Latin the expansin of moods and tenses which we have in Modern English. There is no conditional mood in Latin, you can never translate the subjunctive of any verb as could, unless it be the verb “can” [posse]. You can only use the English subjunctive or may or might, depending upon the Latin construction. I explain this in my Latin Grammar published by The Francisan Archive. But as is said in argument 13, If you renounce something, which is of itself not the substance of the thing which is to be renounced, you have not renounced the substance of the thing. Just as if a Father renounces acting like a Father, he remains the Father. Only a phenomenologist would disagree. But the Church is Thomistic and Aristoelian in its laws, because the Church is founded on realities not appearances. If you reject only the accident of a thing, you still have the thing. Christ shows us this in the Eucharist, when He has renounced all the accidents of His Humanity to appear as Bread. But its still Him.

O ya, definitely, 100% for certain that Benedict did NOT intend to resign. Yep, this is a no brainer. Got the absolute truth from God through Barnhardt. The new house theologian for trads.

Sometimes people out smart themselves to the point of becoming stupid.

Bergoglio is not the Pope for the simple reason he is not a Catholic. No one needs Benedict to have a false abdication in order for Bergoglio not to be a pope.

And Ratzinger has embraced nearly as many heresies as Bergoglio.

Here we must publicly decry the ignorance of all who say the present subjunctive of vaco, vacare in Latin can be translated with could. It just ain't so! There is no conditional mood in Latin!

Along with the “could be” from the precise English translation, perhaps another data point that Miss Barnhardt might explicate in the near future will be Fr. Schweigl’s credible statement regarding a “difficult yet triumphal decision” of a future pope. She and others may even re-think the premise of a “serious error” having occurred since Pope Benedict’s purposeful decision was likely made in light of having read both the description of as well as Our Lady’s interpretation of the Third Secret. The decision which he announced in the Declaratio has kept both the indefectibility of the Church and the infallibility of the Papal Office safe from the diabolical rot that surrounds him.

More and more are becoming aware of the facts surrounding Fr. Schweigl’s statement. In 1952 at Pope Pius XII’s request, Fr. visited Sr. Lucia and asked her a total of 31 questions. He wrote an article that was published in a journal from the Russicuм College in Rome in 1956 entitled, “Fatima and the Conversion of Russia”. In this article on page 15 he states, “The Third Secret [of Fatima] deals with a victorious, triumphal decision by the Pope, triumphal, yes, but also difficult and heroic”. That could definitely describe Benedict’s decision.

Source please

docmx001: This information from Fr. Schweigl, SJ comes from Guido Del Rose in a talk entitled “Fatima and the ‘Last Times’ Apostasy”, Cassette Tape #4 of 11 tapes, ca. 2004. Mr. Del Rose was the Custodian of the U.S. National Pilgrim Virgin Statue of the Blue Army for many years. Having a great devotion to Our Lady from his youth, he also traveled to Europe on various occasions to Conferences, Lectures, other discussion meetings where Fatima experts spoke and reported on the Fatima Message. Fr. Schweigl’s statement can also be found in Vol. 3 of Frere Michel’s excellent trilogy The Whole Truth About Fatima on page 252 Footnote #39. Is this the source you are requesting?