The Impeded See Thesis as Expressed by a Friend

“Pope Benedict XVI allowed the Cardinals to decide to incorrectly interpret the Declaratio as an abdication document, resulting in an illegitimate call for a Conclave, which placed the Pope in a state of Impeded See, where he kept the Munus and lost the Ministerium.”


The definition of Impede See: an alternative to the Vacant See, where the Pope is imprisoned, confined, exiled and not free to express himself.  Art. 335 of the Code of Canon Law states:
‘When the Roman See is vacant or entirely impeded, nothing is to be altered in the governance of the universal Church; the special laws issued for these circumstances, however, are to be observed.'”

10 thoughts on “The Impeded See Thesis as Expressed by a Friend”

  1. I recommend Dr. Mazz’s book, he does a good job to show the modernist mind of Ratzinger and his corrupted view of the papacy as a sacrament. Thus, it is clear that Pope Bendict XVI thought that “once Pope, forever Pope” so he tried to resign the “job” of Pope, but he thought that he could never stop “being” Pope, even if he wanted to.

    • I trust you in pointing out that if one wants to picture Pope Benedict as a modernist, it would help to read Mazza’s book. I have not read it but I know of his hostility toward Pope Benedict. If you would like to understand better the non abdication and the Impeded See situation, I suggest you to read the book “The Ratzinger Code” by Dr. Cionci.

  2. Only he clearly was not imprisoned, confined, nor exiled and he was indeed free to express himself (eg his 2019 essay)

    Substantial error is the better explanation, although motives are not facts, they can only be assessed.

    • I agree with you that substantial error is the better explanation. However, we don’t need that either. All we need is the facts as you wrote. Motive is not necessary to determine invalidity of the renunciation.

    • He clearly was not imprisoned in the cartoonish sense of a prisoner tied to the wall with chains, :). That would not have happened because Francis had all the interest to show that Pope Benedict abdicated, when, in reality, he did not. He was definitely and clearly confined and not completely free to express himself because he was deprived of half of his ministerium, the government of the Church. That’s the impediment that comes from the Impeded See.
      As of the substantial error I have a different view. It appears to me, based on Cionci’s investigation, that this option is obsolete and unproven. How would you explain his answer to Peter Seewald, when talking about the Declaratio: “No Pope has resigned in a thousand years”. This is a reference to the events around Pope Benedict the VIII, in 1013. By recalling this example he shows that he knew exactly what he meant to do when he presented the Declaratio. In addition, but this of course is just a circumstantiated opinion, to think of Pope Benedict the XVI of a man that would make a mistake of this proportion in, probably, the most important step of his life, is close to impossible. His life’s work is a tribute to rigor, precision and reason, whether one agrees with his decisions or not.

      • If I may react to “To think of Pope Benedict the XVI of a man that would make a mistake of this proportion in, probably, the most important step of his life, is close to impossible”.

        Of course we’re here in the domain of intentions, rather than facts. And the facts speak for themselves. Having said that, it could be not so much a ‘ mistake’, he was to intelligent yes, but rather an deliberate action based upon an erroneous (modernist) theological conviction as to the papacy. The Miller dissertation* shows that he and other modernist Germans openly speculated in that direction.


        • And – as we’re still in the domain of intentions, where no one can be proven wrong – to add another argument against an impeded see: his silence. Even after 5, 6, 10 years, even in his postumous book: never a word that may have led the sheep away from the false Prophet.

          I think two strong arguments that make substantial error more probable than impediment. But, again, intentions can not be known, only assessed.

        • We are in the domaine of intentions and it might be hard to use the Miller dissertation to support the intention of Pope Benedict to be thinking of a papacy in the way of those theologians thought of it. The opposite is true.
          There are many facts that support the idea that Pope Benedict knew well the implication of his Declaratio. If he unintentionally made a juridical mistake, he would have considered himself not a Pope. The following list proves that he knew he was still the Pope and that there was only one legitimate Pope:
          – he continued to dress in white
          – he always said “There is only one Pope” and he never said it was pope Francis
          – he continued to sign his letters P.P.
          – he continued to give the apostolic blessing
          – he said he was the first Pope to resign in the last 1000 years and the only one to do it with his full authority, because Benedict the VIII took the ministerium before the Emperor gave it to him and he had to resign it so that the Emperor could assign it to him properly
          – he made his secretary say that we could believe it or not but the answer was in the book of Jeremy, a book that talks about an imprisoned prophet and the only book in the Bible in which the phrase “I am impeded” appears in the text
          – through his secretary, he explains the expanded ministry, with the mention of only one legitimate Pope. This goes directly against the theory that he would intend the papacy like the modernists did. Why would there be an expanded papacy with one legitimate pope and one illegitimate. It was a “de facto” expanded papacy because one pope made a coup d’état and was illegitimate. This is another argument supporting the Impeded See.
          – he knew very well that it is impossible to divide Munus and Ministerium, and he never did that. He never signed a document saying that he had resigned the Ministerium. After the announcement, on February 11, of a future resignation at the “vigesimal hora” of February 28, there was no document signed ratifying the resignation, only a message to the Cardinals The resignation of the Ministerium was forced upon him by the illegitimate call a Conclave with a living and reigning Pope.

          These are not all the signs that Pope Benedict used to let us know about his real condition, despite the fact that he was confined, controlled by his jailer pope Francis, therefore not free to express himself because impeded. There are other signs and messages he sent and probably many more that we do not known yet, we just need to keep asking questions and not stop when some easy and dubious shortcuts are presented.
          Most of the facts can be found in Dr. Cionci’s book: “Il Codice Ratzinger” and some are new because Dr. Cionci’s investigation is ongoing. I suggest you to read the book so that you can better understand the Impeded See fact.


Leave a Comment