False. You misstate her position as well as the idea that she was the first to come up with the "Benedict is Pope" idea. That honor actually goes to Fr. Gruner of blessed memory (akacatholic.com/did-fr-gruner-consider-francis-an-anti-pope). But don't let that get in the way of your remote diagnosis Dr Freud.
I have to respond this way because my comment section is on the fritz.
Let's begin at the beginning.
In what way have I misstated her claims/position/argument?
Quote Fr Gruner where he claims the resignation was invalid owing to substantial error...
Gruner claims "Benedict in his resignation says “I am not resigning the munus…”
That would be interesting IF that is what he said in his declaration:
Declaratio of February 10, 2013 in which Pope Benedict XVI announced his decision to renounce the papacy. In the Declaratio, Pope Benedict declares the following (emphasis added):
I have convoked you to this Consistory, not only for the three canonizations, but also to communicate to you a decision of great importance for the life of the Church. After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry. I am well aware that this ministry, due to its essential spiritual nature, must be carried out not only with words and deeds, but no less with prayer and suffering. However, in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the barque of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me. For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant and a Conclave to elect the new Supreme Pontiff will have to be convoked by those whose competence it is.
Dear Brothers, I thank you most sincerely for all the love and work with which you have supported me in my ministry and I ask pardon for all my defects. And now, let us entrust the Holy Church to the care of Our Supreme Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and implore his holy Mother Mary, so that she may assist the Cardinal Fathers with her maternal solicitude, in electing a new Supreme Pontiff. With regard to myself, I wish to also devotedly serve the Holy Church of God in the future through a life dedicated to prayer. (Declaratio, Pope Benedict XVI, February 10, 2013)
Fr Gruner is wrong - so wrong that what he said is a lie.
Pope Benedict did not say what Fr Gruener claimed he said.
However, because there is free will you are at liberty to believe all of the lies you desire.
How have you misstated her position? Here’s how. You state: “Said differently, had Francis acted as a normal Pope she would never have created this claim because if she had she would be supporting a two pope reality. That is, if she is right that Benedict is Pope because substantial error then the Church would have two popes even if Francis had acted ...
You are having difficulty I see. That is not her stated position - Substantial error is (as I noted) what you quoted is the unseen and unacknowledged consequence of her position.
How have you misstated her position? Here’s how. You state:
ReplyDelete“Said differently, had Francis acted as a normal Pope she would never have created this claim because if she had she would be supporting a two pope reality.
That is, if she is right that Benedict is Pope because substantial error then the Church would have two popes even if Francis had acted like a real Pope.”
Any fair reading of her posts, that is, a reading by anyone who does not wish to misinterpret them, would provide an understanding that she endorses the basic Catholic principle that we only have one Pope at a time. There is no such thing as a “two pope reality.” Regardless of whether Francis “acted like a real Pope” as you put it, if Benedict’s “resignation” was ineffective, we would still only have one Pope. We might have a second person acting like a pope, but he still wouldn’t actually be Pope. This is actually a central point in Barnhardt’s arguments - that there can only be one Pope and the Petrine office can not be bifurcated as +Ganswein said in later interviews. It strains credulity that you don’t actually get that. If you don’t.
As for your scurrilous accusation, “Fr Gruner is wrong - so wrong that what he said is a lie” you need to remove the plank from your own eye on that one. Take another look at the announcement that you quote from. Benedict was renouncing the ministry, NOT the munus. This distinction was subsequently made quite clear, but AB can speak for herself: https://www.barnhardt.biz/2021/06/26/when-someone-tries-to-claim-ratzinger-has-never-said-that-he-intended-to-only-partially-resign-the-papacy/.
Of course if you insist on a neutral third party to draw the distinction between munus and ministerium, feel free to check what Fr. Z said on the subject: https://wdtprs.com/2021/06/the-question-of-two-popes-bothers-a-lot-of-people-some-thoughts/
PS – it is possible to disagree without accusing others of lying or spreading lies.