Dear frdbelland,
To remind you of what you wrote in a previous post:
in my lifetime as a Priest, I have never heard of "Petrine Ministry", neither in Theology nor Canon Law.
And in your latest post you wrote:
Dear Holy Cannoli, the Google search reveals that the term "Papal Ministry" shows up only in post VCII documents.
Please read my post more carefully. Whether or not the term “Petrine Ministry”(not “Papal Ministry”as you have now incorrectly written) came, according to you, after VCII one would think that a person with your credentials in Theology and Canon Law would have at a least some familiarly with the term especially since it can be traced to St. Peter himself.
But, what do I know? Unlike you, I am just a simple man with no real formal training in theology.
----------------------------------------------
Incidentally, I disagree almost completely with your first lengthy post on this thread. Briefly you do not address the pressing homosexual issue within the Church and what needs to be done, what can be done and who can do it if anyone. At this point, nothing else matters. I am unable to go into detail now but perhaps later.

Dear Holy Cannoli, the Google search reveals that the term "Papal Ministry" shows up only in post VCII documents. When I say I haven't seen such terminology, I am referring to the traditional theological textbooks on the Church. If you wish to use post VCII terminology which changes the whole nature of the Papacy, that's your prerogative, but I will stick with the traditional terminology.

I don’t have any fancy degrees in theology etc. but even a simple man like me knows how to use a search engine. Search engines help me not to look like an idiot.
www.google.com/search

Dear Dr. Bobus, I don't know what your background in Theology is, but I must confess that in my lifetime as a Priest, I have never heard of "Petrine Ministry", neither in Theology nor Canon Law. The Chair of Peter has always been referred to as the Petrine Office. And this because the exercise of an Office IS NOT the same as the Office itself. Simply put, if one whose office, job if you will, demands that he supervise the assembly line of some factory one day, the designers another day, the inspectors another day and so forth, does that mean that he has 3 or whatever number of offices so that when he's not supervising the assembly line, the loses that office for the day? I beg your pardon, but anyone with common sense would answer NO! The Office and the exercise thereof are absolutely distinct.

frdbelland
The Petrine Mministry is Governance and Teaching (including Infallibility). When BXVI retired, becoming emeritus, he renounced them--and tbe Petrine ministry. .

Has any even considered, for the sake of argument, that even if Pope St. Pius X, had he been elected in 2005 instead of Benedict he COULD NOT HAVE “cleaned house”? Why? Precisely because the apostasy in the Church was in full blossom, even involving Cardinals and Bishops. Wouldn’t it be stupid to think that those in charge would obey him? And secondly, how is he going to find every Deacon, Priest, Bishop and Cardinal and whoever else, in order to publicize their excommunication in the event that such a move would be made?
For me, it seems reasonable that the enemies of the Church had to be identified, for it is easier to do battle with the enemy when one knows where they are. So WHAT BENEDICT DID WAS TO RETAIN THE PETRINE OFFICE, RENOUNCED THE “EXERCISE” OF THE POWER GOVERNING AND THE POWER OF TEACHING WHILE CONTINUING THE “EXERCISE” OF THE POWER OF SANCTIFYING, and thus retired to Mater Ecclesiae in order to do penance and pray! In this was the enemy would come out of the woodwork and expose themselves. And in this way it is up to the Faithful to say: “Hey, that those apostates are doing is not Catholic and we don’t want anything to do with them; and then the could associate with Benedict who is the true Pope and the Church.
The Visibility of would be sensible again, being that people would have to make a choice: either they are FOR Christ and the True Church or they are with Satan and his apostates. And since the primary element in the Visibility of the Church is the Pope, we MUST recognize that there is an “emperor” without clothes who presents himself as Pope and turn our attention to the True Pope. Furthermore, because social unity, i.e., the unity of the Faithful must first and foremost begin with unity of the True Faith: the integral Unity of Doctrine and Practice, Its Unity with Sacred Scripture, and it’s Unity with the past. And the Church Militant would have the task of watching for and ridding the Church of any apostates who have not sincerely converted.
It is my contention that Benedict made a very courageous and ingenious decision for the Common Good of the Church, but no one seems to realize or want to realize what he did, that God used him as a secondary cause in order to keep Official Power from the hands of Satan, i.e., from those under the control of Satan, and thereby preserved the INDEFECTIBILITY OF THE CHURCH, and kept the promise of Christ to Peter at Caesareae Philippi that “the gates of hell will not prevail over It” from mockery. Please read the following excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
• “The GIFT OF INDEFECTIBILITY is expressly promised to the Church by Christ, in the words in which He declares that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it…. It is manifest that, could the storms which the Church encounters so shake it as to alter its essential characteristics and make it other than Christ intended it to be, the gates of hell, i.e., the powers of evil, would have prevailed. It is clear, too, that could the Church suffer substantial change, it would no longer be an instrument capable of accomplishing the work for which God called it into being. He established it that it might be to all men the school of holiness. This it would cease to be if ever it would set up a false and corrupt moral standard. He established it to proclaim His revelation to the world, and charged it to warn all men that unless they accepted that message they must perish everlastingly.” …………….
“It was said above that one part of the Church’s gift of indefectibility lies in her preservation from any substantial corruption in the sphere of morals. This supposes, not merely that she will always proclaim the perfect standard of morality bequeathed to her by her Founder, but also that in every age the lives of many of her children will be based on that sublime mode. Only a supernatural principle of spiritual life could bring this about” (The Catholic Encyclopedia 1913, Vol. 3 under ‘Church’ Pg. 756).
I have shown that this is in fact what Benedict did in what I call my “Thesis”, and if anyone is interested, he is welcome to email me with a request at frdgelland@netscape.net. God bless and Our Lady protect you all.

A dumb article. The 300 page dossier had both financial and homosexual info. It was quite likely the reason BXVI resigned, realizing that he was too old and lacked the management chops to attack the problem. Ratzinger is not a naive man, but he learned that the problems are deeper than he thought.
The dossier was turned over to Francis.
IMHO, the McQueerick, Penada, Death Penalty releases were intended to divert attention from Francis' cohorts--Maradiaga, Farrell, Tobin, Wuerl, et al.