Assorted links on the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI

I don't want to keep putting up posts on this. It is a little depressing. I want people digging this out of some memory crystal of the first 100 centuries of the internet to say "why did he need to name the Pope in the title of this post? only one Pope in the third millennium resigned". So this post will serve as the dumping ground for any more stories I come across. Fr Alexander Lucie Smith fears

The ordeal awaiting us – watching all and sundry pontificating on all matters Papal and religious

Amen, Father.

Apparently the Pope will resign the Papacy exactly 365 days older than Blessed John Paul II was when he died.

The Impossible "Road Map" of Peace with the Lefebvrists
How does Radaelli see the healing of this opposition? In his judgment, “it is not the model of Church obedient to dogma that must once again submit to the pope,” but “it is rather the model obedient to the pope that must once again submit to dogma.”
In other words:
"It is not Ecône [editor's note: the community of the Lefebvrists] that must submit to Rome, but Rome to Heaven: every difficulty between Ecône and Rome will be resolved only after the return of the Church to the dogmatic language that is proper to it.”
That was February 9th. Two days later all bets were off when the present Pope made his declaratio.

Brendan O'Neil, secularist agnostic (scroll down), rides to the rescue of the Church in Ireland.


Dr Edward Peters asks When will the conclave start? His conclusion is the same as mine (lucky him), i.e. not before 15th March. Also who can be elected Pope? Turns out married men are not excluded, also note the explanation at the end for why the 15 days don't begin until midnight 28th February-1st March (c.203). He also contradicts the assertion that the Cardinals might be able to adjust the start for the next Conclave: "There is nothing ambiguous about the two-week waiting period set out in [Universi Dominici Gregis] 37 and—long story made short—ambiguities in the law, not inconveniences, are what are subject to ‘interpretation’."


Tim Stanley lists the ways the mainstream media just doesn't get God or Catholicism.
If someone retired at work, who would you invite to give the farewell speech? Someone who liked and understood them, or someone who hated or never even met them? Parts of the media seem to overwhelmingly favour the latter, which is why we’ve seen the usual suspects wheeled out to give commentary on the abdication – campaigners for women priests, defrocked Marxists, "humanists" and, worst of all, the ubiquitous disgruntled cradle Catholics.


There are only two "Vatican watchers" worth reading. That is they know what they are talking about and they appear to have decent sources. John Allen discusses Cardinal Bertone.

(Among "Vatican watchers" I read some poor sap recently who talked about the Vatican having a "Swiss army" – that might be news to André Blattman).


The other Vatican watcher worth reading is Sandro Magister.
In the Philippines, which is the only nation in Asia where Catholics are in the majority, there shines a young and cultured cardinal, archbishop of Manila Luis Antonio Tagle, the focus of growing attention. As a theologian and Church historian, Tagle was one of the authors of the monumental history of Vatican Council II published by the progressive “school of Bologna.” But as a pastor, he has demonstrated a balance of vision and a doctrinal correctness that Benedict XVI himself has highly appreciated. Especially striking is the style with which the bishop acts, living simply and mingling among the humblest people, with a great passion for mission and for charity.
The antics of the Bologna school are regularly covered by Magister.


An evisceration of a story in the New York Times. Summed up in the opening line: