Cionci replies to Barnhart and Mazza on the claim of Substantial Error in the Renunciation
https://twitter.com/CionciAndrea/status/1525336614532153344
Comments are closed.
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
cookielawinfo-checbox-analytics | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". |
cookielawinfo-checbox-functional | 11 months | The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". |
cookielawinfo-checbox-others | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other. |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance". |
viewed_cookie_policy | 11 months | The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data. |
This important video DOES HAVE ENGLISH SUBTITLES.
If you view no other apologia for the continuing papacy of Benedict XVI, see this one as it logically critiques the arguments of all sides of this debate, & the difficulties Bergogolians raise.
Send it to all those (like many parish priests) who are troubled about Francis, but not yet prepared to say he’s an antipope.
One particularly valuable detail which I drew from this broadcast was the “lack of simultaneity”: that 11 ii ’13 produced a declaration to renounce; come 28 ii, there was none. Some might argue that 11 ii included a “vacatio legis,” but then we’re back to the original issue: the munus was not renounced.