MARTIAL LAW – In the spiritual realm.

 1. Archbishop Ganswain’s statements.
     Archbishop Georg Ganswain is the secretary and constant companion of Pope Emeritus Benedict for several years now. Surely the wisdom of the Pope must have  rubbed on the good Archbishop by now. And anything he says would reflect  the mind of the theologian and holy Emeritus. Well planned remarks can only come from the wisdom of the combination of these two theologians. 
     For the purpose of comparative study, let us make two lines, like a parallel. The words of Pope Benedict and Archbishop Ganswain will be one of the line in the parallel. It will show, also. the trend of the true Catholic Church.
     The other line of the parallel is the sinful world. We view them as two parallel lines, only, for the purpose of study and comparison. In truth, these lines collide and are in constant warfare. 
     These past years this second line, the world, had been covered in a dark cloud of confusion that is now covering the earth, specially the Church. And the news are filled with desperate cries for help.  The Ark of Noah is nowhere to be found. The slightest sight of  the Church would be of the greatest help. 

     Suddenly from the silence of the desert that is Mater Ecclesiae a voice rang out. Archbishop Ganswain saying that Pope Benedict is still Pope. That was like a silent 9 magnitude in the Richter scale earthquake that shocked the Vatican but unfelt in the rest of the world. It was hardly noticed by the media or they intentionally did not notice it because they did not know how to react to it. Pope Francis just remarked; ‘he had retired.’ But that was not what Ganswain said. Suddenly a hot debate is going on. And we cannot stay out of it. 
     Let us look at the trend of the behaviour of Pope Benedict  from Vatican II up to the present. His behaviour can be landmarks showing the journey of the Church from Vatican II up to the present time; and hopefully leads  to the safety of the harbour in the vision of Don Bosco. 

2. Ratzinger and Vatican II.
     When Pope John XXIII became Pope, he saw that the Church had problems from his readings of the works of Rosmini. The Church have had never ending problems but  she had managed  them in the past.
     But John XXIII thought it was a more serious problem this time because the Church seems to be bleeding to death, as Rosmini described it in his ‘The five wounds of Christ.’ So he, urgently, convoked an Ecumenical Council.  Undoubtedly there seems to be a serious problem.
     Pope John gathered the best minds to head the committees and worked on the topics for discussions. His goal was to prepare the Church as a bride worthy to wed Christ for His Second Coming. For this reason he took the name John to be like St. John the Baptise who prepared the world for Christ’s First Coming. 
     The Council begun and Ratzinger was there to view the unfolding of the two battle lines, the City of God and the city of man. 

The Council was supposed to cure a serious malady of the Church. First aid was insufficient. The semi-last resort was necessary, an Ecumenical Council, because the problem was not provincial or national.  It was world wide. 
    At the end we shall show how Pope Benedict used the last resort; described by Archbishop Ganswain as the ‘Papacy of Exception,’ and that Pope Benedict did not resign and is still the Pope. 

   3. FIRST STAGE. Status quo. 
     To be able to say what Ganswain said, Ratzinger should know the state of the Church before Vatican II (if possible as early as the time of the apostles), at  his time during Vatican II, and after Vatican II.
      Vatican II  would be a good point of reference because the Catholic Church was completely represented in the Vatican. She either had the visible signs of the true Church as described in the Nicene Creed or she does not have them. She is either the Catholic Church or she is not. If she is in between, she would not be the Church of Christ.
      So Ratzinger can compare the Church during Apostolic time, during Vatican II, and at present. As Ratzinger, as Pope Benedict and as Pope Emeritus, he will try to retain continuity from Apostolic time up to the present, which is the Catholic way of doing things. 

     Ratzinger and the status quo during Vatican II.    
     Joseph Ratzinger entered Vatican II as a ‘periti’,  well equipped for his role. He was a liturgist, a theologian and a professor. He was well acquainted with the Holy Rule of St. Benedict and monasticism. And his thesis was on the Theology of history according to St. Bonaventure wherein he was knowledgeable with the Seraphic doctor’s concept of the 6th day, i.e. Good Friday, which is the description of the state of the Catholic Church at a very specific time in history, commonly described as eschatology. Ganswain’s remarks is based on this latter knowledge. 
     Eschatology is the science of applying the prophetic messages of Divine Revelation to the future of the Church. As his thesis Ratzinger was trying to resolve what St. Bonaventure could not resolve during his time, which is expected since prophecies cannot be interpreted unless they are already happening. Ratzinger’s job in the Council prevented him from further studying his thesis.

      Ratzinger thought that the Council would be facing  common solvable problems as in the past centuries,  like during the council of Trent. Vatican II begun with the intent to fix ordinary Church illnesses. Joseph Ratzinger was already in the scene as a bishop participant in the Council. 

     The clear presence of a schism.      
     Again, the council was a microcosm of the Catholic Church. The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church should be present in the Council  at  the Vatican.  Where else can her pulse be best monitored than at this time. The entire Catholic Church was represented here. Just sitting in that Council, anyone can see and analyse every aspect of the Catholic Church. The Church was laying down in a laboratory table for everyone to study; especially the state of her health. 
     Ratzinger was assigned to summarise the on goings of the four general deliberations which he summarised and published in a book, entitled ‘Highlights of Vatican II.’ Here he wrote down the general discussion but did not go into detail. Other authors would go into very fine details of the debates and the personalities involved. Any one who put these materials together can describe the scenarios and the actors involved. And judge each Act in the drama. And Ratzinger noticed; there was an existing schism among the Council Fathers. 
      In this First stage that describes the state of the Catholic Church, it is noticeable that the Catholic Church was clearly divided into two irreconcilable groups. The progressives and the ‘Patrum,’ sarcastically called so because they were sticking like a leach to the teachings of Divine Revelation and the interpretation of the Fathers of the Church (thus ‘Patrum,’ meaning of the Fathers.)
     The progressives, as the word expresses, wanted to change the teachings of the Catholic Church to conform to what they thought is the solution to present day problems. They wanted a church that will submit to all the sinful desires of men. The names of Cardinals and bishops who belong to both  groups are all known; but we can say, in general, that they latter was led by the School of Bologna. 
     The ‘Patrum’ were those who believed that the Church of Christ, the Apostles and the Fathers of the Church are still up to date in solving the most modern problems. They could not imagine a God who would give teachings that has to be adjusted every century to adjust to the problems of men. That would be total confusion. 

     The battle between the two groups begun almost at the very beginning of the Council. Pope John XXIII appointed mostly ‘Patrums’ as heads of the committees. After his death, the progressives were able to take over the heads of the committees and changed the very syllabus for discussions. It was total chaos. It was a Church in a state of Schism. 
     Superior in intellectual gifts,  however, the ‘Patrum’ stood their ground during the discussions. But during the votation and the rewriting of the documents the progressives were able to control the Council. As noted, the progressives could even cut off the microphones when the ‘Patrums’ were speaking. Charity was nowhere. We, indeed, have a very serious problem.
     After Vatican II, Ratzinger tried to continue to solve the problems of the Church as a member of the Curia. During those times he wrote ‘The Ratzinger Report,’  subtitled ‘the Crisis in the Church,’ where he detailed the crisis in the Catholic Church in these terse words; ‘the priests and the hierarchy did not know the teachings of the Catholic Church.’ And he proved it. That is like saying; there is no Faith anywhere around, except probably in the Vatican where John Paul I and John Paul II were sitting. 
     It was the prophecy of Christ, Himself, predicting that at these times there will be a decay of Faith and its subsequent waxing cold of Charity. 

4. SECOND STATE. As Pope Benedict.
     Then Ratzinger was elected as Pope Benedict XVI. The continuity from Apostolic times to his times was very evident in his talks specially in the General Audiences. But the two parallel lines were diverting further and further away from one another. During  his Papacy the two groups were completely unrecognisable. The true Church could not be found anywhere. And the ‘new’ church that was being pushed during Vatican II could not be defined properly. Is this ‘new’ church a Protestant sect or a new pagan religion. It was confusing because it used Catholic terms but with totally different definitions. For the word Charity, the definition given was  Sigmund Freud’s ‘Id.’ 
         
    True to his Papal oath pronounced immediately after his election Pope Benedict did try to solve the problem using the hermeneutics of continuity; which is the usual process of evangelisation.  
      The progressives were using the hermeneutics of discontinuity wherein they believed that there is a complete cut from the Catholic Church of Christ and the Apostles…. and the post Vatican II church. Benedict was able to block them in their efforts but it was with great effort. He could not even have his ‘Summorum Pontificum’ accepted. He was worried what will happen after he passed away.

5. THIRD STATE.  State of Exception.
     As Ratzinger and as Pope Benedict , he saw that the ordinary evangelisation process used after Vatican II did not work. He saw that the extraordinary process used during Vatican II did not work. And he saw that the Papal Office used as zealously as he did, did not work. 
    The picture was ugly.  The progressive movement that he saw started during Vatican II had developed into a tidal wave during his Papacy. The progressives had the shame to approach him and tell him him to his face to resign.

     When everything done has not worked, the only recourse is Martial Law…..the suspension of existing laws with the head making the laws necessary to confront the deteriorating situation. 
     Unlike Martial Law where the will of the head of state is imposed on the people, in the Catholic Church, the ‘State of Exception’ (or Martial Law) the Will of God is imposed on the Catholic Church.
     To be able to do this, the Head, which is the Pope, must have mastered  the Law of God. He must know the exception to the declared Will of God, which is also God’s Will. And he must know why God had willed to go against His own Will. This is not a purely human or natural behaviour. The state of exception as described by Archbishop Ganswain is an Act of God revealed to man. 

     So when Pope Benedict seemingly resigned which is his declaration of a state of exception, he clearly showed that that was not his decision nor a decision of a committee. That it was a revelation from God. All signs surrounding his declaration of his retirement point to that. 
     Due to the seriousness of the present situation in the Church, Pope Benedict was commanded by God to declare a ‘state of exception’ wherein all existing Church law is on hold and Pope Benedict had to make rules that will solve the Church’s problems though the solution would contradict existing Church laws. This is the essence of the ‘state of exception.’ It is meant for the good of the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls. And the exception Pope Benedict made is that he would resign without actually resigning. 
     That was the declaration of Archbishop Ganswain; he said that Pope Benedict resigned but he did not resign and is still the Pope. And Ganswain described Benedict’s papacy as the ‘Pontificate of exception.’ For a Pope to resign and remain a Pope is quite an exception to the rule. Ordinarily if you resign you stop being Pope. And if you want to be Pope again you should be elected. But we are talking of ‘exceptions.’ 
     This ‘exception’ is common in the Catholic Church. The just celebrated Feast of the Assumption is an exception. That a virgin should give birth is an exception. For a God to die for sinful man is an exception that is almost impossible to understand. And Benedict’s ‘Pontificate of the exception’ will be very difficult to understand for most. 

     After describing the Pontificate of Benedict as ‘a Pontificate of Exception’ Archbishop Ganswain mentioned the prophecies of Malachy. What was he trying to do? First, he described the direction of the true Pope and the Church. Then he was hinting on the direction of the tidal wave that is trying to drown the Woman of the Apocalypse whom God had transferred to the desert to protect her. 
      Knowing the forth coming events, Pope Benedict resigned so he can see what will follow after his Papacy. And then he took, again, his Papacy to guide the Church when the tidal wave have hit the Church. 

      From past knowledge, Pope Benedict knew the direction of the tidal wave spawned by the earthquake caused by the schism within Vatican II. 
     He knew the names of those bent on completely changing the Church to conform to all the desires of sinful man. It was original sin all over again. And he knew that Martini and Mario Bergoglio were the candidates chosen to lead. 
     As the exorcists like to say; to overcome the devil, the first thing to do is to expose him and his strategy. Benedict was to expose the strategy of the devil and the only way to make it come out in the open is to pretend  to retire that the devil’s cohorts may install their leader. They were posed during Vatican II, Benedict knew that,  but did not succeed. They did not succeed during the election of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. They knew they could succeed after Benedict. And Benedict, also, knew that from his readings of St. Bridget who he raised as ‘Doctor of the Church.’  So Benedict did what was exceptional. He resigned without giving up the Petrine office, as Ganswain declared. So that the leader might be exposed in the open.
     And what was exposed? Ganswain mentioned St. Malachy. If Benedict is the second to the last Pope and he is still Pope, then who is Pope Francis. Some have written books that Pope Francis is the last Pope St. Malachy called ‘Peter Romanus’ because he is an Italian, thus ‘Romanus’ and he is Pope, thus ‘Peter.’ But every one knows that ‘Peter Romanus’ is not going to be elected by a conclave. He will be personally appointed by Christ as St. Peter was appointed by Christ. In effect, Pope Francis is completely out of the picture in the vision of the Catholic Church. He becomes either an invalidly elected pope or an anti-pope. He is not in the list at all.
     If Pope Benedict is  the second to the last Pope and resigned; and is now Pope again, isn’t it possible that he  had been re-appointed by Christ, Himself, thus is also ‘Peter Romanus’ because he is Peter, still the Pope. And he is ‘Romanus’, the reason he had purposely stayed in the Vatican, Rome? So Benedict, according to St. Malachy’s list mentioned by Ganswain, is the second to the last Pope and the last Pope. One person under two names? Well, ‘exceptions,’ you know. 
     
6. This is quite an intellectual exercise like a theological and philosophical Rubik’s cube. But it is a truth of Faith that we must believe in to be saved. Do you believe God had exempted Mary? Do you believe God had exempted Benedict?