¿Por qué Benedicto XVI sigue siendo el Vicario de Cristo?
El Papa Benedicto XVI no renunció al cargo divino que en 2005 lo convirtió en Vicario de Cristo, sino solamente al ministerio de obispo de Roma y a los cargos administrativos del Papado, al declarar (discurso del 27 de febrero de 2013) que él mantendría el “primado petrino”, por lo cual dejó ver que sigue llevando sobre sus hombros la carga y la vocación de ser el Vicario de Cristo. A eso no se puede renunciar, es una cualidad “ad vitam” otorgada por Cristo a Pedro y sus sucesores.
El Papa Ratzinger pronunció, un día antes de tomar el helicóptero para retirarse temporalmente a Castel Gandolfo, un discurso que aclara la situación que guardan los dos “Papas” que actualmente viven en Roma.
En esa alocución se refirió a la invitación que recibió de Dios cuando fue electo sucesor de San Pedro el 19 de abril de 2005. En esa ocasión dijo (párrafo 23) que la vocación que recibió de Cristo es ad vitam (para toda la vida) y que, por ello, nunca podrá renunciar a ella (como siempre lo entendieron todos los Papas en la historia de la Iglesia): “El siempre es también un para siempre, no hay más un retorno a lo privado”. “Mi decisión de renunciar al ejercicio activo de ministerio no revoca esto (el primado petrino)”.
Además, Benedicto estableció, ante los órganos jurídicos de la Iglesia, que él conservaría la sotana blanca, mantendría el apelativo “Su Santidad”, conservaría las llaves de Pedro en su escudo, y seguiría siendo Papa, añadiendo simplemente el epíteto “emérito”. Esto último es muy significativo pues, cuando el Papa Gregorio XII renunció, volvió a ser cardenal, y cuando el Papa Celestino V renunció, volvió a ser monje. No lo estableció así el Papa Benedicto XVI. Él estableció que seguiría siendo Papa, caso totalmente inédito en la historia de la Iglesia.
Ese discurso expresa claramente la convicción de que él seguiría siendo Vicario de Cristo y cabeza espiritual de la Iglesia, y de que solamente estaba renunciando a los cargos administrativos del papado. En su mente, una cosa es el ministerio del obispo de Roma, y otra cosa es el primado petrino, el cual es ad vitam y al que no se puede renunciar. Sic et simpliciter.
La válida renuncia al papado exige renunciar al munus, (cargo del oficio de Pedro) como expresa el Código de Derecho Canónico (CDC canon 332.2), no al ministerium, como hizo el Papa Benedicto XVI.
Veamos el tenor literal del canon 332.2 del CDC:
“Si contingat ut Romanus Pontifex muneri suo renuntiet, ad validitatem requiritur ut renuntiatio libere fiat et rite manifestetur, non vero ut a quopiam acceptetur”. (“Si el Romano Pontífice renunciase a su cargo se requiere, para la validez, que la renuncia sea libre y se manifieste formalmente, y que no sea aceptada por nadie”.
Leyendo el texto de la renuncia de Benedicto XVI se observa que el Papa no renunció al munus petrino sino solo al ministerium como obispo de Roma: “declaro me ministerio Episcopi Romae… commisso renuntiare”.
Una persona tan sabia como Benedicto XVI entendía perfectamente que la renuncia al papado, para ser válida, requería renunciar al munus, no solo al ejercicio del mismo (ministerium). No cabe aquí alegar ignorancia. No en él, quien es una de las personas más doctas y conocedoras de los asuntos eclesiásticos. Por tanto, esa diferencia en la fórmula empleada quería significar algo. Algo así como: “Sigo siendo el Vicario de Cristo, aunque renuncie yo al gobierno ejecutivo de la Iglesia. No lo puedo decir abiertamente, pero aquí seguiré, vestido de Papa, viviendo en el Vaticano y llamándome “Su Santidad”, para quien lo quiera entender”.
Benedicto XVI es aún el Vicario de Cristo, porque nunca renunció a tal cargo pero, para mayor claridad, nos dice explícitamente que solo renunciaba al ministerium.
Recordemos que el papado es un cargo, como nos recuerda la Constitución Dogmática Lumen Gentium: “Porque el Romano Pontífice tiene sobre la Iglesia, en virtud de su cargo (munus) como Vicario de Cristo y Pastor de toda la Iglesia, plena, suprema y universal potestad, que puede siempre ejercer libremente”. Así lo declaró antes también el Concilio Vaticano I en 1870, repitiendo el magisterio anterior, en particular, el del Concilio de Florencia del siglo XV.
En el papado, el munus se recibe con la elección en el cónclave y se pierde con la muerte, y el ministerium, que es consustancial a él e inseparable, equivale al ejercicio jurídico del obispado de Roma, hoy cabeza de todos los episcopados . Al haberlos separado, Benedicto XVI está lanzando un mensaje muy fino y delicado al mundo y a la Iglesia.
Las famosas palabras de monseñor Gänswein, arzobispo alemán, jurista, secretario personal de Benedicto XVI y prefecto de la Casa Pontificia de “Francisco”, sobre un “ministerio alargado” (con dos miembros) confirman de manera contundente esa misma conclusión: Benedicto XVI sigue manteniendo la investidura o munus, luego Francisco no es realmente el Vicario de Cristo.
Monseñor Gänswein recordó que Benedicto XVI no renunció ni a su nombre ni a su hábito talar blanco: “Él no se retiró a un monasterio aislado, sino que continúa dentro del Vaticano, como si hubiese dado apenas un paso al costado, para dar espacio a su sucesor y a una nueva etapa en la historia del papado”.
Por eso Benedicto XVI sigue vestido de blanco, con su solideo, el anillo del pescador, su título de Papa y el apelativo Su Santidad. No volvió a ser cardenal Ratzinger, como sucedió con Gregorio XII, quien volvió a ser el cardenal Angelo Correr después de renunciar. Benedicto sigue en el Vaticano y no se ha vuelto a su querida Baviera o a algún monasterio lejano, y no es cardenal Ratzinger.
Ni hace falta decir que monseñor Gänswein no hizo estas gravísimas declaraciones sin contar con el apoyo del propio Benedicto XVI. No fue más que una explicitación de las conclusiones en su despedida del 27 de febrero de 2013.
De hecho, Benedicto XVI no usó la fórmula de renuncia establecida por Bonifacio VIII. La norma expresa que regula la disciplina sobre la renuncia papal se encuentra en la Constitución Apostólica Quoniam aliqui, que fue fijada en el Código de Derecho Canónico de 1917, y actualmente en el canon ya citado del CDC de 1983, el #322.2.
Veamos el texto de esa Decretal de Bonifacio VIII:
“Decretal de Bonifacio VIII (in 6°), 1.1, T.7, cap. 1: De Renunciatione: «renunciare valeat Papatui, eiusque oneri, et honori…”. Es decir, se establece que debe renunciar explícitamente a su cargo y a todos sus honores.
Tampoco usó la fórmula empleada para renunciar usada por el único Papa que lo hizo antes que él, Celestino V: «cedo Papatui, et expresse renuncio loco, et dignitati, oneri, et honori» («me retiro del Papado y, expresamente, renuncio al lugar y a sus dignidades, cargas y honores»).
Por el contrario, Benedicto XVI usa por primera y única vez la fórmula explícita y clara “ministerio Episcopi Romae… commisso renuntiare” (renuncio al ministerio de Obispo de Roma).
Al cumplir sus 90 años, el 16 de abril de 2017, el Papa Benedicto XVI fue fotografiado en los jardines vaticanos.
Monseñor Gänwein muestra sonriente que Su Santidad sigue llevando el anillo del pescador, signo de la autoridad papal.
Conclusión: en la Declaración de renuncia leída por Benedicto XVI el 27 de febrero de 2013, no hay alusión alguna al canon 332.2 del CDC, lo que parece extrañísimo viniendo de alguien tan conocedor y minucioso teólogo. Tampoco usó ni la fórmula de la Decretal de Bonifacio VIII (renuntiare Paptui) ni la fórmula usada válidamente por Celestino V (oneri et onori). Gran mensaje para la Iglesia y para el mundo:
la vocación que recibió de Cristo al primado petrino, a ser su Vicario en la tierra, es simplemente irrenunciable “El siempre es también un para siempre, no hay más un retorno a lo privado”. Así lo quiso hacer, y así lo hizo.
Benedicto XVI Magno: ¡Grande entre los Grandes!
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
Pope Benedict XVI did not renounce the divine office that in 2005 made him Vicar of Christ, but only to the ministry of Bishop of Rome and to the administrative offices of the Papacy, by declaring (speech of February 27, 2013) that he would maintain the ” petrino primacy “, for which he showed that he still carries on his shoulders the burden and the vocation of being the Vicar of Christ. That can not be renounced, it is a quality “ad vitam” granted by Christ to Peter and his successors.
Pope Ratzinger pronounced, one day before taking the helicopter to temporarily retire to Castel Gandolfo, a speech that clarifies the situation that keep the two “Popes” who currently live in Rome.
In that speech he referred to the invitation he received from God when he was elected San Pedro’s successor on April 19, 2005. On that occasion he said (paragraph 23) that the vocation he received from Christ is ad vitam (for life) and that, for that reason, he will never be able to renounce it (as all Popes always understood in the history of the Church): “He is always also a forever, there is no more a return to the private”. “My decision to renounce the active exercise of ministry does not revoke this (the Petrine primacy).”
In addition, Benedict established, before the legal organs of the Church, that he would keep the white cassock, keep the name “His Holiness”, keep the keys of Peter on his shield, and continue to be Pope, simply adding the epithet “emeritus”. The latter is very significant because, when Pope Gregory XII resigned, he was again a cardinal, and when Pope Celestine V resigned, he became a monk again. This was not established by Pope Benedict XVI. He established that he would continue to be Pope, a case totally unprecedented in the history of the Church.
That speech clearly expresses the conviction that he would continue to be Vicar of Christ and spiritual head of the Church, and that he was only resigning from the administrative offices of the papacy. In his mind, one thing is the ministry of the bishop of Rome, and another thing is the Petrine primacy, which is ad vitam and can not be renounced. Sic et simpliciter.
The valid renunciation of the papacy requires renunciation of the munus, (office of Peter’s office) as expressed in the Code of Canon Law (CDC canon 332.2), not the ministerium, as Pope Benedict XVI did.
Let’s see the literal tenor of Canon 332.2 CDC:
“If contingat ut Romanus Pontifex muneri suo renuntiet, ad validitatem requiritur ut renuntiatio libere fiat et rite manifestetur, non vero ut a quopiam acceptetur”. (“If the Roman Pontiff renounces his office, it is required, for validity, that the resignation be free and be formally manifested, and that it be accepted by no one.”
Reading the text of the resignation of Benedict XVI it is observed that the Pope did not renounce the Petrine munus but only the ministerium as bishop of Rome: “I declare to me the ministry of Episcopi Romae … commisso renuntiare”.
A person as wise as Benedict XVI understood perfectly that the renunciation of the papacy, to be valid, required to renounce the munus, not only to exercise it (ministerium). It is not possible here to claim ignorance. Not in him, who is one of the most learned and knowledgeable of ecclesiastical matters. Therefore, that difference in the formula used meant something. Something like: “I am still the Vicar of Christ, even if I renounce the executive government of the Church. I can not say it openly, but here I will continue, dressed as a Pope, living in the Vatican and calling me “His Holiness”, for those who want to understand it “.
Benedict XVI is still the Vicar of Christ, because he never resigned to such a position but, for clarity, he explicitly tells us that he only renounced the ministerium.
Remember that the papacy is a charge, as the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium reminds us: “Because the Roman Pontiff has on the Church, by virtue of his office (munus) as Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the whole Church, full, supreme and universal power, which can always exercise freely. ” This was also stated by Vatican Council I in 1870, repeating the previous Magisterium, in particular, that of the Council of Florence of the fifteenth century.
In the papacy, the munus is received with the election in the conclave and lost with death, and the ministerium, which is inseparable to him, is equivalent to the legal practice of the bishopric of Rome, today head of all episcopates. Having separated them, Benedict XVI is sending a very fine and delicate message to the world and to the Church.
The famous words of Monsignor Gänswein, German archbishop, jurist, personal secretary of Benedict XVI and prefect of the Pontifical House of “Francis”, on a “long ministry” (with two members) strongly confirm that same conclusion: Benedict XVI continues maintaining the investiture or munus, then Francisco is not really the Vicar of Christ.
Monsignor Gänswein recalled that Benedict XVI did not renounce either his name or his white talar habit: “He did not retire to an isolated monastery, but continues inside the Vatican, as if he had only stepped aside, to give space to his successor and a new stage in the history of the papacy. ”
That is why Benedict XVI is still dressed in white, with his skullcap, the fisherman’s ring, his title of Pope and the name of His Holiness. He did not become Cardinal Ratzinger again, as happened with Gregory XII, who once again became Cardinal Angelo Correr after resigning. Benedict remains in the Vatican and has not returned to his beloved Bavaria or to some distant monastery, and is not Cardinal Ratzinger.
Needless to say that Monsignor Gänswein did not make these very serious statements without the support of Benedict XVI himself. It was only an explanation of the conclusions in his farewell of February 27, 2013.
In fact, Benedict XVI did not use the resignation formula established by Boniface VIII. The norm expresses that regulates the discipline on the papal renunciation is found in the Apostolic Constitution Quoniam aliqui, which was fixed in the Code of Canon Law of 1917, and currently in the aforementioned canon of the CDC of 1983, # 322.2.
Let’s see the text of that Decretal by Boniface VIII:
“Decree of Boniface VIII (in 6 °), 1.1, T.7, chap. 1: De Renunciatione: “resignare valeat Papatui, eiusque oneri, et honori …”. That is to say, it is established that he must explicitly renounce his position and all his honors.
Nor did he use the formula used to resign used by the only pope who did it before him, Celestino V: “cedo Papatui, and expresse resignation loco, et dignitati, oneri, et honori” (“I withdraw from the papacy and, expressly, I resign to the place and its dignities, burdens and honors »).
On the contrary, Benedict XVI uses for the first and only time the explicit and clear formula “Ministry Episcopi Romae … commisso renuntiare” (renounced the ministry of Bishop of Rome).
Conclusion: in the Declaration of renunciation read by Benedict XVI on February 27, 2013, there is no mention of canon 332.2 of the CDC, which seems strange coming from someone so knowledgeable and thorough the theologian. Neither did he use the formula of the Decretal of Boniface VIII (renuntiare Paptui) nor the formula validly used by Celestino V (oneri et onori). Great message for the Church and for the world:
Thank you for your reply your Excellenc.
Due to the length of my post it might have been hard to notice I mentioned using auto-translation (which was Google translate in Chrome).
It is just not easy to tell at times if Google gets it right. I know it often misses nuance and at times I’ve found it can even say the opposite of what is actually stated in the original article.
It’s good to know I wasn’t reading too much into the article that it did not actually saych. Although I’m still not certain my speculation about the “indelible character” of the Petrine office being the same as that of a priest or if Benedict still being the Pope in any capacity necessitates believing that Francis is an anti-pope, due to what I thought was the impossibility of two legitimate successors of St.Peter sitting in his chair and “weilding the Keys” at the same time.
I’ll read it again to try to detemine if I missed what was said on this, but any short clarification on this point, or my perhaps misguided understanding re the impossibility of two concurrent valid Popes…although two valid Popes seems oxymoronic…but I’m no trained theologian…so what do I know?
Hellenback,
Goggle will gladly translate it for you for free. You have done a good job of translating it already. You have caught the main point of the author.
Margaret,
Google will gladly translate it for you !!!
English, please…..
If there is a kind Catholic soul out there who can translate this accurately into English, I believe it would be greatly appreciated by more than the two of us who have asked for an English version. I have tried auto-translate but feel it is too important to leave to the awkward and often inaccurate translations produced by such software.
The best I can make of the gist of it, is that based on a talk Pope Benedict gave in 2005(?), the author puts forth the theory (I can’t tell if it is stated outright) that because a Pope or the Petrine ministry is a lifetime vocation from God (that marks the man with and indelible status like the priesthood?) Pope Benedict could not and did not decide to abandon the Papal ministry. He decided rather to live it out in a different manner, the best and only way he knew how (and perhaps how God ultimately Willed him to do so at this time in history and under the circumstances in the Vatican).
There is a fair bit of speculation in what I have said due to many words coming up as “unknown” or “no translation”. In addition, the syntax is often very different in Spanish so an algorithm can easily get present/past tense wrong, as well as as other subtle but indispensable aspects of language.
I have no intention of putting words in the author’s mouth or ascribing to the article a sense or meaning that it did not actually have or possibly even state.
As I said, I only tried to get the “gist” of what was a long post and realize there is much more to it than the points I have tried to put together. But if what I have said is inaccurate I would be more than happy to be set straight on even “the gist”.
Thanks for bearing with a poorly educated monoglot 😉
Sorry, Lourdes, it is not available in English.
May I receive whatever you wrote here in English? Thank you, sincerely in Christ,
Lourdes delCalvo LdelCalvo@gmail.com
Sent from my iPhone
>