Question sur le statut de Ratzinger

[chartreux]

La plupart des personnes moyennement informées que je connais croient que lorsque l'antipape Ratzinger a démissioné, il a abdiqué de toutes ses fonctions. J'ai souvenir que cela est inexact, et qu'il conserve encore une certaine "charge pétrine", mais je n'ai pas retrouvé les sources où j'avais lu cela. Quelqu'un peut-il confirmer (de préférence par des références officielles ?)

[Si vis pacem]

 

La plupart des personnes moyennement informées que je connais croient que lorsque l'antipape Ratzinger a démissioné, il a abdiqué de toutes ses fonctions. J'ai souvenir que cela est inexact, et qu'il conserve encore une certaine "charge pétrine", mais je n'ai pas retrouvé les sources où j'avais lu cela. Quelqu'un peut-il confirmer (de préférence par des références officielles ?)
 

One objection is that the papacy has been secularized by the resignation; that it is no longer a unique office but an office like any other.

I had to accept that question, and consider whether or not functionalism would completely encroach on the papacy, so to speak. But similar steps had already been made with the episcopacy. Earlier, bishops were not allowed to resign. There were a number of bishops who said ‘I am a father and that I’ll stay’, because you can’t simply stop being a father; stopping is a functionalization and secularization, something from the sort of concept of public office that shouldn’t apply to a bishop. To that I must reply : even a father’s role stops. Of course a father does not stop being a father, but he is relieved of concrete responsibility. He remains a father in a deep, inward sense, in a particular relationship which has responsibility, but not with day-to-day tasks as such. It was also this way for bishops.
Anyway, since then it has generally come to be understood that on the one hand the bishop is bearer of a sacramental mission which remains binding on him inwardly, but on the other hand this does not have to keep him in his function for ever. And so I think it is also clear that the Pope is no superman and his mere existence is not sufficient to conduct his role; rather, he likewise exercises a function. If he steps down, he remains in an inner sense within the responsibility he took on, but not in the function. In this respect one comes to understand that the office of the Pope has lost none of its greatness, even if the humanity of the office is perhaps becoming more clearly evident.
 

Voyez cependant ici.
 

[chartreux]

Merci pour ces références, cher SiVis ! Je note dans le passage auquel vous m'avez renvoyé, Boniface VIII est presenté comme vrai Pape, tandis qu'il apparaît comme antipape dans la liste de Wikipédia.

[Si vis pacem]

 

 
Merci pour ces références, cher SiVis ! Je note dans le passage auquel vous m'avez renvoyé, Boniface VIII est presenté comme vrai Pape, tandis qu'il apparaît comme antipape dans la liste de Wikipédia.
 

Boniface VIII, le pape de l'attentat d'Anagni et de la bulle Unam sanctam ...antipape ???

.... Ne confondez vous pas avec Boniface VII ?
 

[chartreux]

.... Ne confondez vous pas avec Boniface VII ?
 

Si ! C'est comme l'autre fois où je confondais Pie IX et Pie XI ...