Care to elaborate on the tone of your post?
Why certainly. IMNVHO, The Vatican has placed itself in a rather awkward position reminiscent to me of the Avignon Captivity, and other times, when more than one Pope was claiming the throne. Pope Benny tried to back out gracefully, but apparently the nomenclatura wouldn't allow it.
As a title, "Pope Emeritus" seems completely bogus to me. Furthermore, I think I can see in the swirling competition between various factions, why Pope Benny may have resigned to begin with.
Furthermore, the dichotomy between the sacred and the profane within the Roman Church has always fascinated me. Take for example, St. Francis of Assisi. He preached the dispersal of earthly treasures to alleviate the sufferings of the poor. Yet, upon his demise, the religious order((s) that grew up around him owned a major piece the real estate in Northern Italy. Is he any less a saint? Of course not. Is this not historically remarkable? Of course it is.
I also confess that I cannot quite take this new fellow as a serious heavyweight thinker and consider him a sort of dabbler around the edges of Liberation Theology .
Now is my tone somewhat irreverent? Why yes, I believe I must confess it is.