Author Topic: Pope Benedict XVI resigned because of Vatileaks and the SSPX situation (Read 941 times)

Geremia · « **on:** January 04, 2014, 05:58:58 PM »

according to his brother Fr. Georg Ratzinger.

Does this mean Pope Benedict's resignation was forced and therefore invalid?

Quote from: NBCNews.com (my emphases)

Pope's brother: Pontiff was troubled by butler's revelations
12/02/13 17:31

Pope's brother: Pontiff was troubled by butler's revelations

NBCNews.com

Pope Benedict XVI was troubled by "some great challenges" during his time in office -- including [1] allegations of corruption within the church that were illegally exposed by his former butler [Vatileaks] and [2] his relationship with a controversial Catholic brotherhood [the SSPX] -- the pontiff’s brother said Tuesday.

Speaking to reporters in Germany, Georg Ratzinger said the pope was “doing relatively well” and his announcement Monday that he was going to stand down had not had an effect on his health.

On Monday, Benedict, 85, explained his resignation, saying that the papacy required “strength of mind and body” and his had deteriorated in recent months. On Tuesday, the Vatican acknowledged for the first time that the pope has had a pacemaker for years and that its battery was replaced a few months ago in secret, Reuters reported.

“But you notice that the aging process impacts body and soul, and especially on his strength," Ratzinger said Tuesday. "And he thinks that with a reduced workload he couldn't carry on this great responsibility, that a younger person is needed to capture the problems of today's time and who has the power to do what has to be done.”

'Indiscretions'
[Fr. Georg] Ratzinger said the pope’s time in office had “created great challenges for him,” highlighting two particular issues [Vatileaks and the SSPX] that concerned his brother.

"Within the church a lot of things happened, which brought up troubles, for example the relationship to the Pius Brotherhood [SSPX] or the irregularities within the Vatican, where the butler had let known indiscretions [Vatileaks],” he [Fr. Georg Ratzinger] said.

“These were emotional years, but with God's help and his own commitment, I think he mastered it rather well,” he added.

Ratzinger did not specify the pope’s issues with the Pius Brotherhood, or Society of St. Pius X as the group is formally known.

But in late December, Bishop Bernard Fellay, head of the group, described Jєωs as “the enemies of the church” to widespread condemnation from within and outside the Catholic Church. Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, reportedly said it was “absolutely unacceptable, impossible to define Jєωs as enemies of the church.”

In October, the pope’s former butler Paolo Gabriele was given an 18-month prison sentence in the so-called “Vatileaks” case, after he was found guilty of stealing thousands of Vatican docuмents -- including some of Benedict’s private papers and letters alleging corruption within the church -- while working for the pontiff.

Some of papers were leaked to the media and, in court, Gabriele said he acted out of concern for the church and the pope. The pope pardoned Gabriele just before Christmas.

On a brighter note, Ratzinger said foreign trips had also been “important” to the pope, enabling him “to have a pastoral impact, to find friends and to create understanding for the message of the Gospel.”

Reuters contributed to this report

(source; mirrored source from John Vennari's CFnews.org)

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #1 on:** January 04, 2014, 08:31:42 PM »

I bet there are papal docuмents proclaiming Jєωs as enemies of the Church.

Then, of course, there is the Book of Acts.

Describing the Jєωs as enemies of the Church is ordinary Catholic theology.

Only the post-Vatican II sect describes Jєωs as if they'd were friends.

Sigismund · « **Reply #2 on:** January 04, 2014, 10:01:57 PM »

I don't see anything here to suggest he was forced. he had plenty to resign in shame over, however. Assuming he is capable of that emotion.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #3 on:** January 05, 2014, 04:31:20 PM »

“Emeritus” Ratzinger and Francis are two sides of the same coin.

It was common knowledge that one of the goals of BXVI was to bring traditionalists (namely the SSPX) to Rome. With them in mind and for this purpose he concocted Summorum Pontificuм. A trap +Fellay fell into.

As John Vennari predicted shortly after BXVI took office, he had the potential of fractioning the traditional movement since he knew well all the main figures inside out as cardinal.

Thanks to (mainly) +Williamson, who kept exposing the plans and intentions of +Fellay taking the SSPX to Rome at any cost, the plans failed and BXVI became tired of waiting because Rome was too anxious to get “the New Evangelization” (or “Evangelical Catholicism”) going which is nothing more than the One World Church as prophesied by Anna Katherine Emmerick.

Yes, it’s true the Vatileaks, the Homo Mafia, Bank scandals…played a part but have you noticed how the Vatican Banking is suddenly all "in order"? They sold the Church to the enemy. BXVI wanted traditionalists "reintegrated" before all this to keep them under control. Nothing else.

There have been interviews with the secretary of the “two popes”, Archbishop Ganswein (the latest on Secretum Meum Mihi 1/4/14) in which he stresses there is NO conflict or disagreement between the two, just "different emphasis", "same theology"...

BXVI moved over for Francis to come in and take the Barque of Peter to its enemies which BXVI with his “conservative” facade could not do.

Geremia · « **Reply #4 on:** February 16, 2014, 10:19:29 PM »

If you've heard of Antonio Socci's report that Cdl. Paolo Romeo predicted, in late 2011, that Benedict XVI would be αssαssιnαtҽd in 12 months, which the German Compact magazine independently corroborated in July 2012, you know that it is a very real possibility that his resignation was invalid due to grave threats.