Italy: Francis' “Our Father” Will Be Introduced

Y'know, Thor... if you don't want to be contacted, don't come back a day later and reply to me. Is that going to be your new little game? Creeping around days later, leaving your spoor here and there in some pathetic attempt to have the proverbial "last word?

Oh, you poor little thing. You truly are desperate!

"Benedict says in his speech his decision to resign the active ministry (not the office note) does not revoke his promise taken at his papal inauguration."

No, that's you re-wording Benedict's original statement to suit your own argument. He doesn't need a speech-writer. You know how to use quotes. Do so.

"In addition he speaks of a new way to remain at the side of the crucified Christ in the enclosure of St Peter (ie the papacy)."

There is no "i.e" in his original statement. That's you adding your interpretation to what he actually said which didn't include anything supporting your claim.

"Benedict believes erroneously that he can bifurcate and alter the nature of the papacy by splitting the office and the ministry and delegating aspects of it in a collegial manner to another pope."

Benedict was explicit. In his formal resignation letter where he renounced his ministry. In his last General Audience he clarified his resignation by renouncing the office as well. To wit,

"I no longer bear the power of office for the governance of the Church"

Benedict explicitly and in his own words renounced both the ministry and the office of the Papacy which entirely contradicts your repeated lies claiming otherwise.

I've said it before. You're a liar.

"His writings at one stage spoke of a triumvirate wielding the papal office in replication of the Holy Trinity."

[Citation Needed, None Given]

...which with your track-record of falsehood probably means a.) you made the claim up entirely or b.) you deliberately re-wrote/ misinterpreted something he said.

"As such his botched resignation is riddled with errors and aside from its obvious failure to be MANIFESTED PROPERLY looks also like it was made in error."

We've covered Canon Law already. There is nothing in the statue even remotely close to your invented standards of what constitutes a "proper" manifestation.

Again, you're just telling more lies. Making up more bogus claims and then repeating them over and over again on every post, like some diarrhetic cocker-spaniel on his daily walk around the neighborhood. Your content quaitly is on par with the pup.

"I expect all of this is just too nuanced for you ."

Not at all! :D Oh, no. Quite the opposite, love.

I recognize perfectly what you're attempting. Regrettably, getting out your thesaurus and trying to muddy the issue isn't going to help you.

Modesty aside, I have a better vocabulary than you do, Thor. My writing style is more lucid as well. I choose to write clearly for the sake of a general audience.

Unlike you, I don't need to shroud my statements with deliberately abtruse terminology.

All this "nuance" of yours is another one of your deceitful little tricks because your claims fail on the facts as they always do..

In this case, your "nuance" is a failed bid at sounding erudite and quasi-canonical. I'm not impressed.

You're an excrable debator and your understanding of canon law is even worse..

Simply put, all yer big words ain't foolin' nobody, bub. :D