May 18, 2026 (Steven O’Reilly) – As reported in Roma Locuta Est’s last article, John-Henry Westen and Patrick Coffin recently called into doubt, again, whether the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI was valid (see Was Benedict XVI Still Pope? Vatican Petition Sparks Debate). In part one we took a look at Mr. Coffin’s claim that Benedict XVI continued to “sign” his name with the acronym “PP” which only popes use. In that article, I showed why Mr. Coffin’s claim was untrue (see The Errors of Mr. Coffin on the PP signature and Apostolic Blessings). In the same Roma Locuta Est article I also took a look at Mr. Coffin’s erroneous claim that Benedict’s imparting of Apostolic Blessings meant he was still pope after his resignation. In this present article, we’ll take a look at yet another erroneous claim made by Mr. Coffin in the same podcast.
Those who believe Benedict did not resign the papacy, or had only partially done so, have long had a problem with the fact Benedict XVI adopted the title of pope emeritus after his resignation. Some of them suggested the use of pope emeritus itself meant that Benedict has intended to, or believe he had, remained pope in some way after his resignation.
Is Pope Emeritus a “word salad”?
In his interview with Westen, Mr. Coffin dismissively waves off the title of pope emeritus as a “word salad,” as if it had no real meaning in relation to Benedict’s position as a former pope. Mr. Coffin said (Bold and Italics added by O’Reilly).
“Even Pope Emeritus is kind of word salad, and emeritus in Latin doesn’t mean old retired guy. It means he who merits the office.” (c. 10:18-10-27)
While it is true that pope emeritus itself had not been previously used before Benedict, emeritus does have a basis in canon law from which we can see an analogy with what Benedict intended by the title.
For example, canon 185 reads: “The title of emeritus can be conferred upon the person who loses an office by reason of age or by a resignation which has been accepted.”[1] So, here we already see that the one who “lost” an office due to resignation can use the title of emeritus. Already, just from this canon, it is not difficult to see by analogy that by using emeritus in his title (pope emeritus) that Benedict clearly indicates he is no longer pope.
Furthermore, Canon 402.1 states in part: “A bishop whose resignation from office has been accepted retains the title of emeritus of his diocese…“[2]. Per the canon, the former bishop holds the title of “Bishop Emeritus” of whatever diocese (e.g., Bishop Emeritus of Atlanta). According to a canon law commentary, this “This symbolizes an ongoing relationship to the people whom he had previously served as diocesan bishop”[3].
So, while canon law doesn’t speak of a pope emeritus, we can make out the general principle of what it must have meant to Benedict. The title meant Benedict had “lost” his office due to resignation and that emeritus “symbolizes an ongoing relationship to the people whom he had previously served,” which in the case of a pope, is the whole Church; thus “pope emeritus” is quite appropriate to symbolize this ongoing relationship to the whole Church.
I go into all this in one my responses to the many errors of Dr. Mazza, see Dr. Mazza and the “Pope Emeritus”. But the point here is to just underline that Mr. Coffin is simply wrong in suggesting pope emeritus is some confusing “word salad.” As we see above, by looking at canon law, and applying some logic and commonsense, we can readily see what Benedict meant. And, in fact, further below we will see that’s how he explicitly meant it in response to a question from interviewer Peter Seewald.
What is the meaning of “Emeritus”?
During the podcast, Mr. Coffin also stated, as cited above, that emeritus means “one who merits the office.” But, once again, we must ask: is what Mr. Coffin says actually true?
If one checks, this is not the case. For example, Merriam-Webster under “emeritus” defines it as follows (bold and italics added):
“In Latin, emeritus was used to describe soldiers who had completed their duty. It is the past participle of the verb emereri, meaning “to serve out one’s term,” from the prefix e-, meaning “out,” and merēre, “to earn, deserve, or serve.” (Merēre is also the source of our word merit.)”
This is consistent with Oxford’s pocket Latin dictionary which defines emeritus as “veteran,” i.e., one who had served out his term, one who is no longer a soldier. Therefore, based on such definitions, we see that emeritus in Latin was used of veterans, i.e., “to describe soldiers who had completed their duty”, or ‘to serve out one’s term.’ The meaning is quite clear, “emeritus” is used of one who had completed their service, and is no longer what they once were. So, we use the term, for example, professor emeritus of one who is no longer a professor.
In the case of the title Pope Emeritus, this should be understood as someone who ‘served out their term as pope’, i.e., one who is no longer pope, one who no longer holds the papal office.
And, in fact, that is how Benedict XVI both understood and used the term. In an interview with Peter Seewald, when asked about the use of pope emeritus, Benedict explicitly replied saying “The word ‘emeritus’ said that he had totally given up his office…” (see Benedict XVI: A Life Volume Two: Professor and Prefect to Pope and Pope Emeritus 1966, Peter Seewald, Kindle, English version].
With regard to Benedict’s adoption of the title of “pope emeritus” his intent is clear enough if one actually reads what he said on the matter. For example, in his interviews with Peter Seewald. In my book (Valid? The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI) and in my article (Dr. Mazza and the “Pope Emeritus”) I lay out the basis for the title of Emeritus, and why it does not suggest Benedict intended to remain pope in any way. For brevity, one example will suffice. As alluded to above, Peter Seewald (his words in italics) when interviewing Benedicts, asks him about the title, and what follows are Benedict’s replies:
What is an emeritus bishop or pope?
The word ‘emeritus’ meant that he was no longer the active holder of the bishopric, but remained in a special relationship to it as its former bishop. So the need to define his office in relation to a real diocese was met without making him a second bishop of it. The word ‘emeritus’ said that he had totally given up his office, but his spiritual link to his former diocese was now properly recognized. In general, a titular see was a pure legal fiction, but now there was a special relationship to a see where the retired bishop had formerly worked. This real, but hitherto legally unrecognized, relationship to a former see is the new meaning of ‘emeritus’ acquired after Vatican II. It does not affect the legal substance of the office of the bishop but acknowledges the spiritual link as a reality. So there are not two bishops but a spiritual assignment, whose essence is to serve his former diocese by being with it and for it in prayer with all his heart and with the Lord.
But does that apply to the pope?
It is hard to understand why this legal concept should not also be applied to the bishop of Rome. In this formula both things are implied: no actual legal authority any longer, but a spiritual relationship which remains even if it is invisible. This legal-spiritual formula avoids any idea of there being two popes at the same time: a bishopric can only have one incumbent. But the formula also expresses a spiritual link, which cannot ever be taken away. I am extremely grateful to the Lord that Pope Francis’s warm and generous attitude towards me has made It possible to implement this idea in practice.
[Source:
As one sees above, in response to the question regarding the use of the emeritus, Benedict said that “The word ‘emeritus’ said that he had totally given up his office”. Note, the original interview was in German. Benedict used the German word Amt where the English word office appears in this translation above. “Amt” in turn is used in the German language translation of canon 332.2, the papal resignation canon. In it, where the Latin munus is used, the German Amt is used (See Dr. Mazza and the “Pope Emeritus”).
Bottom line, Benedict did explain that his use of pope emeritus meant that “he had totally given up his office,” i.e., had totally given up the munus. Analogous to the bishop emeritus and his ongoing relationship to his former diocese (see Note 3) that he previously served, all that remains for the pope emeritus is the ongoing spiritual relationship with those he previously served, which in the case of a former pope, would be the whole Church.
Final Thoughts
With the use of canon law, logic, and some commonsense–as well Benedict’s own words, we can clearly see what Benedict intended by the title of pope emeritus. It was not a confusing “word salad” that Mr. Coffin would have his listeners’ believe. No. The title meant Benedict had “lost” his office due to resignation and that emeritus “symbolizes an ongoing relationship to the people whom he had previously served,” which in the case of a pope, is the whole Church; thus pope emeritus is quite appropriate. The definition of the word itself, emeritus, meant one who had served out his term, i.e., completed it. And in fact, we read Benedict’s own words in the Seewald interview cited above, that “The word ‘emeritus’ said that he had totally given up his office.”
Clearly, Benedict intended and understood by pope emeritus that he had totally given up the papacy. Therefore, Mr. Coffin’s objection here is without merit….pun intended. QED.
At the end of my previous articles, I addressed a few words to those who either believe, or are tempted to believe that Benedict’s resignation was invalid, and that he remained pope until his death. To these especially, I invite and challenge you to check out my articles (see The Case against those who claim “Benedict is (still) pope”), and or my book (Valid? The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI) , and or some of my videos on the topic (see HERE). As you will see – unlike Mr. Westen’s and Mr. Coffin’s treatment of these questions, I actually “look at the evidence” to which they and other Benepapists only give lip service.
Can your beliefs or opinions survive that? Do what to which they only give lip service. “Look at the evidence” and check out the links.
Steven O’Reilly is a graduate of the University of Dallas and the Georgia Institute of Technology. A former intelligence officer, he and his wife, Margaret, live near Atlanta. He has written apologetic articles, and is author of Book I of the Pia Fidelis trilogy, The Two Kingdoms; and of Valid? The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. He writes for Roma Locuta Est He can be contacted at StevenOReilly@AOL.com. Follow on Twitter: @S_OReilly_USA.
Notes:
- James Coriden, et al, eds., The Code of Canon Law: A Text and Commentary, p. 109.
- John P., James A. Coriden, Thomas J. Green, eds. New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, Commissioned by the Canon Law Society of America, New York NY/Mahwah NJ: Paulist Press, 2000….p. 538. Commentary on Canon 402.
- “Once his resignation has been accepted by the Supreme Pontiff, the diocesan bishop immediately becomes a titular bishop and holds the title of bishop emeritus of his diocese. Unlike the custom in the past, he does not receive the title to a titular Church in partibus infidelium (in the territory of the unbelievers) but instead holds the title of “Former Bishop of N.” This symbolizes an ongoing relationship to the people whom he had previously served as diocesan bishop.”(Source: John P., James A. Coriden, Thomas J. Green, eds. New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, Commissioned by the Canon Law Society of America, New York NY/Mahwah NJ: Paulist Press, 2000….p. 538)