Did Pope Benedict Leave Signs that He Remained the Pope?

It may seem strange, but I will begin answering that question by looking at William Shakespeare. For decades scholars argued about who Shakespeare really was. Some insisted that Christopher Marlow was the true author of the plays. The Earl of Oxford was another. In recent years more and more evidence shows that, in fact, Shakespeare was Shakespeare. 

He was the son of John Shakespeare, a recusant who kept the faith, a local low-level politician who resigned his office rather than take the oath of supremacy. His son William's missing years were probably spent being educated on the continent which explains his broad knowledge of Italy, particularly Venice. Another indication of his Catholicism was his ownership of a house in London used for secret Masses. It was exposed when a floor collapsed under the weight of several hundred Catholics hearing the Mass. [Brief article on Shakespeare's Catholicism.]

These facts are joined by the numerous masked references to Catholicism that fill Shakespeare's plays. I'll address only one, The Merchant of Venice. When you read the title recall that many of the priests entering England to offer the Mass came disguised as merchants from the continent. From the very beginning, Shakespeare announces his intention to reference the crisis.

Now for some interesting details. Portia and Nerissa arrive home at night after defending Antonio, the merchant of the title, in court. The courtroom scene itself brings to mind the trial of St. Robert Southwell, a Jesuit priest who offered the Mass secretly to the embattled English Catholics. He entered England disguised as a merchant and many allusions about Antonio reveal a jesuitic nature. Southwell and Shakespeare were cousins and the bard also alludes to him in his sonnets (as well as St. Thomas More).

Shakespeare also gives us Easter vigil imagery in the play. Portia arrives home late at night (after midnight?) and sees the candle burning in the window of her home, Belmont. She hears music. For those with eyes to see, it is Easter imagery with the Paschal candle.  When Nerissa says they did not notice the candle's light when the moon shone, Portia responds that the lesser light can't be seen when the greater is present. She goes on to compare the radiance of a King whose real presence overshadows a substitute. How easily one can see Shakespeare comparing the true faith with the sad situation of the false English church. Claire Asquith, Joseph Pearce, Fr. Peter Milward, and other scholars have convincingly documented Shakespeare's Catholicism. [See Catholic Culture.]

In Russia, under Communism several authors also hid political criticism in veiled allusions. What could not be said out loud could be shown in subtle symbols. The same was true in England. Those who condemned the tyranny of the monarchy faced charges of treason and gruesome execution. What was hidden under the disguise of entertainment (Queen Elizabeth was known to attend Shakespeare's plays.) often escaped the censors.

Which brings me to Benedict and an interesting article that raises additional questions about his resignation from the papacy. What hidden signs indicate that the resignation was forced and therefore invalid? Did Benedict send subtle signs that he was still the pope in addition to his maintaining the papal garb? An article by Nicolas Owen on Substack, Benedict XVI’s Latin Mistakes – and the Meaning of his "Great Decisio," raises a number of troubling points about the Latin "mistakes" in Benedict's Declaratio. Benedict was a Latin scholar and a meticulous writer. Were his Latin words, in fact, mistakes or was Benedict revealing more about what really happened in a veiled manner? And, if so, why? 

The author lists six facts indicating that the resignation was not valid. I'll just give you one which I found rather chilling:

Fact Five: The Latin word commissum means crime.

commissum, commissi [n.] – undertaking, enterprise, secret, crime.

Having noted that Benedict actually spoke the word commissum in his spoken Declaratio, Cionci asked the Latinists Gian Matteo Corrias and Rodolfo Funari to translate this same sentence using commissum instead of commisso. Their conclusion is eye-popping:

declaro me ministerio Episcopi Romae . . . mihi per manus Cardinalium die 19 aprilis MMV commissum renuntiare . . .

“I declare that I renounce, to my own detriment [mihi], the ministry of the Bishop of Rome . . . on account of the crime [per…commissum] of a band of Cardinals on April 19, 2005 . . .”

The nature of this crime can and will be explored further, but the implication is that when Benedict was elected to the papacy in 2005 some sort of malevolent condition or ultimatum was placed on him that came home to roost in 2013.

Read the article. It's interesting that Pope Benedict was still alive when Leo became pope. If this author is correct, what does that say about the papal conclave that chose our current pontiff? When I first came upon this article it was described as a bombshell. Is it? Things seem to be reaching an apex of crisis. I keep shaking my head asking what's next? One priest on substack says we are in "an apocalyptic situation." I can't disagree.

So how should the average Catholic in the pew: parents and grandparents, young laity, etc. respond?  My staple answer is the four P's: Prayer, Prudence, Penance, and Perseverance. If we stay close to Jesus and Mary and look to the three pillars of the church: Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium we can't go wrong. The question is discerning where among a divided magisterium the truth lies. Remember Akita where Mary warned that cardinals would be against cardinals. We're there. What does it mean for us?

Jesus Christ, Lord of the Universe, have mercy on us.

Mary, Seat of Wisdom, pray for us.

St. Joseph, Pillar of Families and Guardian of the Universal Church, pray for us.

St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle.