Skip to main content

Does Canon 17 Refute LifeSiteNews' Theologian: "Benedict [must have]... thought: I only want to resign the Ministerium if it is in fact distinct from the Munus"?

LifeSiteNews' anonymous theologian on Pope Benedict XVI's resignation according to the website claims that Benedict's abdication could only be invalid if he thought ministerium and munus were "distinct":

"Benedict's abdication would be invalid only if he had in his mind the thought: 'I only want to resign the ministerium if it is distinct from the munus.'"
(LifeSiteNews, "Did Benedict really resign? Ganswein, Burke and Brandmuller weight in," February 14, 2019)

Canon law expert Br. Alexis Bugnolo appears to says this is not a correct way to legally approach the resignation because canon law requires an objective reading of what the two words mean using canon 17's criteria and not a subjective reading of what the two words may possibly have meant in the mind of Benedict:

"Canon 17 requires that Canon 332 S2 be read in accord with the meaning of canon 145 S1  and canon 41... requires that ministerium and munus be understood as referring to two different things."
(From Rome, "Ganswein, Brandmuller & Burke: Please read Canon 17, February 14, 2019)

Canon lawyer Edward Peters explains "Canon 17... states 'if the meaning [of the law, and UDG is a law] remains doubtful and obscure, recourse must be made to parallel places."
(Catholic World Report, "Francis was never pope? Call me unpersuaded," September 28, 2017)

I studied some law in college and I am not in any way a canon lawyer, but this is my understanding of what the LifeSiteNews' theologian and Br. Bugnolo are saying.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.



Comments

Anonymous said…
Canon 332, sect. 2 is what comes to my mind as well, because even if Pope Benedict did intend 'ministry' as identical to 'munus', it still remains the case that he has not "properly manifested" this, as he has to in order for his abdication to be valid. Perhaps if valid resignations depended only on intentions, the theologian might have a point. But demonstrating the right intentions is necessary too.
11:24 AM
MEwbank said…
I agree with Cam, although I would prefer to avoid the use of 'subjective' vs. 'objective' as qualifiers concerning this matter.

The fact is that papal resignation is a strictly juridical act and it requires explicit fulfillment of every requisite juridical stipulation to be valid. Interior intention must be fully and accurately manifested in exterior words to accomplish this act.

The language used in his resignation does not fulfill this requisite.

2:54 PM
Alexis Bugnolo said…
Fred,

For the record you understood me correctly.

I think, humanly speaking, most canonists only have habitual experience of the canonical proceedures in annulment cases which regard the Sacrament of Matrimony, which falls under the norms of contractual law.

But the Petrine Succession is totally different. It is not a sacrament nor a vow kind of a thing. It's like the last will and testament of your father. If he did not say he gave it to you, you do not get it. Some other sibling gets it. Or his estate keeps it.

Benedict gave away the ministerium, the doing of the office.

But he never on any occasion before during or after Feb 11, 2013 said he gave away the munus petrinum.

That means that the Petrine Succession has not yet occurred. The train left the station with all the Cardinals and hoopla, but Benedict and his papal office are still on the platform.
7:37 PM
Fred Martinez said…
Br. Bugnolo,

Thank you for your continued courage and clarity.

It would be extremely helpful if you could go into detail into canon 17, canon 332 S2, canon 145 S1 and canon 41 using the example of the last will and testament analogy as contrasted with how other canonists are using the Sacrament of Matrimony contract law analogy.

Also, if you could explain in detail using canon law why canonists are wrong is saying ministerium and munus are synonyms that mean the exact same thing or nearly the exact same thing.

Finally, please explain why the present canon law was instituted by Pope John Paul II and is the supreme law for the Catholic Church until another pope institutes a new one.
9:09 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fr. Chad Ripperger's Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) & Binding Prayer ("In the Name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, and by the power of the Most Holy Catholic Church of Jesus, I render all spirits impotent...")

    Deliverance Prayers II  The Minor Exorcisms and Deliverance Prayers compiled by Fr Chad Ripperger: Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) I bind (myself, or N.) today to a strong virtue, an invocation of the Trinity. I believe in a Threeness, with a confession of an Oneness in the Creator of the Universe. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Christ’s birth with his baptism, to the virtue of his crucifixion with his burial, to the virtue of his resurrection with his ascension, to the virtue of his coming to the Judgment of Doom. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of ranks of Cherubim, in obedience of Angels, in service of Archangels, in hope of resurrection for reward, in prayers of Patriarchs, in preaching of Apostles, in faiths of confessors, in innocence of Holy Virgins, in deeds of righteous men. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Heaven, in light of Sun, in brightness of Snow, in splendor of Fire, in speed of l...
3 comments
Read more

5 Dubia Questions for 1P5's Steve Skojec & All faithful Catholics especially Francis is definitely Pope Cardinals, Bishops & pundits

Here are five really short and easy to answer dubia questions which hopefully aren't too complicated for Steve Skojec, publisher of the One Peter Five website, to answer. To make it really easy for the publisher of One Peter Five it has been formatted so that he only has to answer: yes or no. 1. Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales said "The Pope... when he is explicitly a heretic... the Church must either deprive him or as some say declare him deprived of his Apostolic See." Was St. Francis de Sales a Sedevacantist or a Benevacantist? Answer: yes or no. 2. "Universal Acceptance" theologian John of St. Thomas said "This man in particular lawfully elected and accepted by the Church is the supreme pontiff." Was John of St. Thomas for saying "the supreme pontiff" must be BOTH "lawfully elected and accepted by the Church" a Sedevacantist or a Benevacantist? Answer: yes or no. 3. Do you think that a "supreme pontiff...
96 comments
Read more

UPDATE: Fr. Ripperger's Prayer Recommendation for the Election: He Calls It "The Most Efficatious Prayer in Crushing Diabolical Influence In the Area of Oppression"!

During a recent interview on the Grace Force Podcast on YouTube, Exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger   provided updated information that the prayers he officially recommends  for the laity to say with regard to the election, President Trump and our country  are the two  prayers posted below.  https://youtu.be/UKrLr4jW0Eo First of all, it is very important to start by saying that the usual means of receiving merit and graces are of paramount importance. That is, remain in a state of grace, recite the rosary daily, attend Mass as frequently as possible, receiving frequent communion, and frequent confession.  Father Ripperger mentions that we should offer all these things up and ultimately to be praying for an "honest, fair, and just election"..."and "for Trump's protection."  He references his book,  Deliverance Prayers: for Use by the Laity,  and states, "there is a prayer, and this is the one that I'm going to recommend because it's the one...
Post a Comment
Read more