I can’t tell if the first article is serious or a sarcastic attempt at neo-sedevacantist conspiracy theories.

On the off chance a reminder is needed, just because y’all might not like everything about Pope Francis doesn’t mean he isn’t Pope Francis.

The Pope is the guy doing the Poping. I understand the appeal of the Barnhardt thesis, because it eliminates the constant parsing of the Holy Father's relationship to the Magisterium. I even think that it's possible someday that the Church will decide that's exactly what happened. That time is not yet.

Nobody said any of this was going to be easy.

I’m not clear on how the Petrine office is split? The Francis is doing the poping, Benedict is an old man who stays home and prays. Benedict gave everything up except the white outfit.

I wasn’t planning on arguing this one, but does anyone actually believe that Benedict’s resignation in 2013 was somehow incomplete? Deliberate or not?

For one, Benedict is without a doubt the greatest theological wiz on the last century or so; I have an incredibly hard time believing that he of all people could mess up his own resignation, or that he would sit idly by as succession proceedings took place for in invalid successor that he certainly would know would be invalid.

As to the possibility of him being coerced, come on. His personal secretary Archbishop Georg Ganswein has gone on record saying the Pope Emeritus had been mulling resignation “for quite sometime beforehand,” and that he went ahead anyway despite multiple attempts to change his mind. Is that even that unbelievable? Benedict never looked like he enjoyed being Pope, and he looks happy as can be to not have to deal with the constant hustle and bustle of being Pope. We also now know the only reason he took the job in the first place was because then-Cardinal Bergoglio begged the College to stop voting for him in 2005 (he came around eight years later obviously), and they had no one else to turn to than their then aging semi-retired dean in then-Cardinal Ratzinger.

But let’s say for a minute that Benedict’s resignation somehow was invalid, and that Francis by extension really is an Antipope. What does that say for the many previous popes of ages past who left office under much more controversial circumstances? Has every pope since Celestine V been an antipope? Does the whole sedevacantist conspiracy actually go back centuries instead of years or decades? Were the Protestants actually right that the Catholic Church broke apostolic succession long ago in some Great Apostasy?

Unless one thinks this is all some Matrix-like conspiracy to subjugate the whole human race, this whole matter is not nearly as complicated as some are making it seem. Benedict resigned. Francis is Pope now. Done. Boom goes the dynamite. What is a problem is that to few otherwise faithful orthodox Catholics realize that these preposterous sedevacantist conspiracies pose as great of threat, if not more, to the Faith and Church unity than anything coming out of National Catholic Reporter, Call To Action, or your boogieman of choice. Let’s put our heads together and try to solve the real problems in the Church today instead of these petulant attempts to relitigate the past in a vain attempt to justify sinful disobedience to the successor to Peter.

MarkB

That is one take that is widely held.

Give them enough rope to hang themselves with, in other words, by appearing to hand things over to them but doing so invalidly so that at the right time it can all be undone after they have sufficiently exposed themselves.

Apart from plausibility of the argunent, this would imply that he was willing too feed hundreds of millions of souls to the wolves as some kind of collateral damage.
Can't imagine that Benedict XVI would ever have considered such a deception of his flock.

I think the sinking of the original thread was for the best. Maybe this one too.

Rigors of the job?
Chop at least half the rockstar travel.
Use internet tools for meetings.
Enjoy zero synods with problematic wrapup docs.

I am sorry some are offended or put off by the subject but we must be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. Wolves devour doves. Be not afraid, but be not an ostrich either.

There are posts like this where it makes me wish that Father Anthony Cekada had an account on this forum. Just to hear his input - On music, as well as this situation! (And no, I don't agree with his position.)

and keep her from going completely off the rails.

Small comfort to those watching friends and relatives depart the Church over Francis-ine faddletwarp.

Small comfort to those watching friends and relatives depart the Church over Francis-ine faddletwarp.

One of my close friends has decided to jettison anything Catholic and go Orthodox. He says there is too much craziness in the western church.

I wondered about that. Orthodoxy has its issues, to be sure. But Bartholomew is not the only patriarch and my friend is joining with OCA which is Russian in origin. Not sure how much they connect with Bartholomew.

Isn't departing the Church over a pope's actions a protestant thing? How can real 'traditional catholics' even consider doing so?

we do not ‘follow’ a pope or a bishop. We follow the Faith. Don’t be sifted by questionable actions.

It's more complex than that. To some Magisterial statements (truths taught as divinely revealed) Catholics owe the obedience of faith. To others (definitively proposed statements on matters closely connected to revealed truth) Catholics owe firm and definitive assent. To still others (ordinary teaching on faith and morals) Catholics owe religious submission of intellect and will, but there can be room for disagreement. To a fourth type of Magisterial teaching (prudential teaching on disciplinary matters) Catholics owe external obedience that doesn't exclude the possibility of disagreement. Finally, Catholics owe no assent to merely personal opinions or unofficial remarks offered by a pope or a local ordinary.

I would distinguish that Catholics do indeed follow the pope and their local bishop and that they are obliged to, but in a secondary sense because Catholics first and foremost follow God through Christ, but the pope and bishops are authoritative representatives of Christ on earth to whom varying degrees of obedience are owed as set forth in the paragraph above. The Church is both hierarchical and the People of God.

If a pope or bishop tells you to sing, "City of God," should you obey?

Popes and bishops have been genuine hypocrites when it comes to church music. They consistently say one thing then do another. You can't believe a word they say.

Rigors of the job?
Chop at least half the rockstar travel.
Use internet tools for meetings.
Enjoy zero synods with problematic wrapup docs.

When one's physical infirmities do not include mental ones, this would be possible.

When one's mind is impacted, either through actual dementia or because brain fog is a significant symptom of one's physical illness, this is not possible. It is especially difficult for one who has enjoyed a rigorous life of the mind to believe he is still mentally competent when his mind is far less competent than it once was. He can only judge by his prior competence and brain power, and he no longer measures up to his own standards.

I'm not talking about ordinary aging. I'm talking about physical illnesses that sap not just one's energy but one's ability to think.

MarkB

And if he jumped you would follow? And Charles, you would follow Mark?

Catholics are not such exaggerated and unlimited and irrational ultramontanists.

hAHAHA... many have already jumped!

Here's a picture of one of the many cliffs.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/16/will-pope-francis-cause-a-schism-in-the-catholic-church

However, this is a distraction to the OP's question... if you want to discuss following a pope, I recommend another thread.

This thread is addressing the validity of Pope B's splitting the Petrus Munus.

Rod Dreher warn that it's a fool's errand to flee Roman Christianity

I've read a lot of his work and find him to be a hyper-sensitive kinda guy. He did--correctly--observe that Catholics who have been around and have seen this act before are FAR less likely to jump ship.

We had a significant problem in this Archdiocese in the early 2000's (like Boston did). Between that and knowing a lot of Jesuits, well.....we're inured.