Why I Do Not Think Monsignor Bux Is Helping (Though He Certainly Wants To)

Submitted by LocutusOP on Fri, 11/23/2018 - 14:22
Author: 

docmx001 , Mundabor, Akita, Kate R., Gloria Tell          

Date: 
Friday, November 23, 2018 - 14:00
Article link: 
Why I Do Not Think Monsignor Bux Is Helping (Though He Certainly Wants To)

 

 
docmx001 | November 20, 2018 at 2:45 pm

Mundy, in charity, this seems like deflection on your part. +Bux did not suggest that the conclave needs investigating, but rather, Benedict’s failed partial abdication needs investigating. All indications are that Benedict believes the papacy to be irrevocable once accepted, and thus attempted a bifurcation of the Petrine Ministry by trying to only halfway resign. The key quote directly from +Bux:

“Perhaps – and I say this from a practical point of view – it would be easier to examine and study more accurately the question concerning the juridical validity of Pope Benedict XVI’s renunciation, i.e. whether it is full or partial (“halfway”), as someone has said, or doubtful, since the idea of ​​a sort of collegiate papacy seems to me decidedly against the Gospel dictate. Jesus did not say, in fact,tibi dabo claves … “turning to Peter and Andrew”, but he only told Peter! That’s why I say that perhaps a thorough study of renunciation could be more useful and profitable, as well as helping to overcome problems that today seem insurmountable to us.”

Reply
Mundabor | November 21, 2018 at 6:05 am

he expresses himself in both general and particular terms. I think he would want to examine everything, from the conclave events to the alleged non-abdication. The points in my post, therefore, remain. note that the man has not spoken about this for 5 and a half years, but now thinks revisiting the circumstances of Francis’ election is “helping to overcome problems that today seem insurmountable to us.” No, they are not insurmountable. A heretical problem is not insurmountable. It is something that has been tackled many times i the past.

...

 

Akita | November 20, 2018 at 4:54 pm

I think people are gleeful that someone as prestigious as Monsignor Bux is suggesting Francis’ ascendency to the Throne of Peter may be bogus. The “shifting of the Overton Window” and all that…

...

 

Kate R. | November 20, 2018 at 11:11 pm

Oh I dunno, I thought it sounded like a good idea, but you’ve made fine points. I’m for anything that rids us of this pestilence, so you can’t go by me.
I thought maybe because of St. Gallen’s Mafia, perhaps someone might care enough to follow up on it, but we find that as long as the perpetrators are in agreement with said illegal maneuvers, said illegal maneuvers are never challenged (learned that from US Democrats).

Then I thought that maybe because PB intended the weird “bifurcated papacy” a dual papacy never before done in papal history, that someone might care enough to follow up on it, but we find that we are back in the same place.

The thing always comes down to numbers. If 300 Cardinals declared “heretic!”, he’d be gone already, back Buenos Aires gumming things up again. But we have perhaps, 5?
Is that enough? How many manly Cardinals do you need? We are alarmingly short on manly anything.
Can 1 manly, faithful Cardinal declare heresy and depose him? It doesn’t seem likely, but I don’t know anything. I have a feeling that if that were the case, Vigano would have already done it. But our one man had to go into hiding and toss darts from behind a tree.

...

 

Gloria Tell | November 21, 2018 at 2:04 pm

Are JP II rules so ineffective? The act of interfering with an election would excommunicate those responsible. If those who colluded make up a very small number insufficient for the margin of victory then the new Pope would not be declared invalid. If their number are great and would have swung the election then their subsequent excommunication would prevent their repeating the exercise at the next election and have the effect of cleaning the degenerates from the election process altogether.

Mundabor | November 22, 2018 at 6:33 am

You would never know how most people have voted and it would never be possible to say that some cardinals have swayed a vote i the other direction. Therefore, if this one is the application it would be dead letter. However, the “rule” allows to question basically any election, which is what is happening now.

 

 

 

Own comment: 

In all fairness, it does not matter for practical purposes whether Bergoglio is the true pope or not because we must oppose him all the same. I am of the same mind with Kate R. that I am in favour of virtually anything which "rids us of this pestilence".

The point Msgr. Bux makes though is that the resignation itself has to be examined, a point perhaps missed by Mundabor, or at the very least glossed over, as one comment makes clear. That is the key to everything else.

The Church is in the business of truth and I for one have nothing against the notion that a pope can be a heretic, but we need to know whether he is pope in the first place, because if he is not, then we have a golden highway out of this messy pseudo-pontificate.