Sunday, September 08, 2019

Is Taylor Marshall Afraid to Debate his "Resignationalist" Frequent Quest Co-Host Fr. Nix on the Validity of Pope Benedict's Resignation?

Frequent guest co-host on Dr. Taylor Marshall's YouTube TnT show Fr. David Nix stated he was a “resignationalist”:

"Bishop Gracida of Texas is a great hero of mine for publicly questioning the valid resignation of Pope Benedict XVI.  I know for a fact that at least one other Cardinal in the world is questioning this, too.  But even if you do not buy our 'resignationalist' approach to the current crisis, then at least ask this:  Where are all the bishops denouncing the weekly heresy that we are now hearing from the top down?.. Here is why: The end does not justify the means, whether those means be sins of commission or omission. Have you ever thought of the fact that sins of omission do not justify a good end?"
(PadrePeregrino.org, "Courage over Consequentialism in the Hierarchy," March, 3, 2019)
[https://padreperegrino.org/2019/03/consequentialism/]

Magnanimously, Marshall, who is 100 % against the “resignationalist” questioning of  the "valid resignation of Pope Benedict XVI," has allowed Fr. Nix to, at times, co-host with him on his show.

The anti-resignationalist Marshall in his new book said:

"My response to... Benedict resigned under duress or fear. He claims that he did not and without knowing anything more, we cannot claim it to be so."
(Infiltration, Page 237)

As we shall see Marshall does "know... more."

Marshall, who apparently has no legal background, seems to think because Benedict XVI "claims that he did not" resign under duress there is not a case to be made that a elderly person could have been under pressure despite claiming that he wasn't under duress.

Marshall made this same claim in one of his YouTube TnT shows about a month ago to his co-host Timothy Gordon who went to law school. Gordon explained that under the law a person could have been under duress despite claiming he wasn't under duress.

Strangely enough when I went to the YouTube playlist so I could quote the show it appears to be listed as "Deleted video."

It is possible I could be wrong, but all the other videos within the same time frame don't cover this subject.

 This back and forth in the video stuck to my memory because of the emotion I saw when Gordon contradicted Marshall's claim explaining that under the law someone could be under duress despite claiming not to have been.

Marshall at that moment had a displeased look that appeared to be anger for a moment and then recovered his poker face when his co-host showed it was possible Benedict resigned because of pressure despite claiming otherwise.

The strange thing is that Marshall himself narrated the duress or pressure that Benedict was in at the time in his August 27, 2018 YouTube video "Dr. Taylor Marshall ties together Vatican financial scandal with homosexual activity":

"First of, Vigano blew the whistle on money laundering."

"Two, the accusations of money laundering leads to the Vatileaks scandal."

"Three, the Vatileaks scandal leads Benedict to form a secret investigation with three cardinals."

"Four, those three cardinals expose moral rot, sexual deviancy, that is paired up with financial irregularity."

"This is what moves the Pope to resignation. And just to make sure there is enough pressure on him to do it and do it quick something funny goes on with the Vatican Bank beginning on January 1, 2013."

"And it seems the powerful cardinals within Vatican City wanted it to happen fast because they don't want the 300 page dossier released to the public because there is moral scandal in those pages."

"That binder was left with Pope Francis, but nothing has been done. And what we see is that those who were oppose to Benedict XVI theologically, but also on administration, have been reinvolved, reinstated and promoted."

Why is Marshall now saying there is no possibility that Benedict resigned because of pressure or duress thus possibly making it invalid?

Even pro-Francis Cardinal Walter Kasper and canon law expert Nicholas Cafardi say that it is "difficult, if not impossible" for a pope to resign "if a political faction in the Church is trying to force it."
(Reuters, "Can the pope's accusers force him to resign?", September 3018 and LifeSiteNews, Cdl. Kasper: A 'forced resignation' of Pope Francis would be invalid,"  January 30, 2019)
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/cardinal-kasper-a-forced-resignation-of-pope-francis-would-be-invalid#ampshare=https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cardinal-kasper-a-forced-resignation-of-pope-francis-would-be-invalid and https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1LN1IL#ampshare=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pope-abuse-law/can-the-popes-accusers-force-him-to-resign-idUSKCN1LN1IL]

If Kasper and canon law expert Cafardi are right that it is "difficult, if not impossible" for a pope to resign "if a political faction in the Church if trying to force it" then Pope Benedict XVI probably, if not for sure, is still Pope which would mean Francis is not a valid or real pope.

Was there "a political faction in the Church trying to force" Benedict to resign which put into "doubt... whether the situation [Benedict was] in... really allow[ed] for a free choice" as Cafardi said to Reuters?

Was Benedict's stepping down "a forced resignation [which] would [make it] invalid" according to Kasper and canon law expert Cafardi ?

Was there "a political faction in the Church trying to force" Benedict to resign?

Respected pro-gay Italian journalist Emiliano Fittipaldi, one of two journalists charged in the Vatileaks trial in the Vatican court for obtaining confidential Church papers, inferred that "a political faction in the Church [was] trying to force" Benedict to resign:

“Ratzinger [Pope Benedict XVI]... was very traditionalist and conservative... but he did important things. The things he did in relation to pedophilia, which was not much, but double the time for prescribing crimes in the Vatican, sent away almost 600 priests in a few years. The incredible thing is that Francis did a lot less."

"... The story of the gay lobby has... importance in the Vatileaks and the dismissal of Pope Ratzinger... He destroyed the careers of those who were with them. To stop this group, a group of supporters of Ratzinger began to issue a series of documents, which was called Vatileaks... He destroyed the careers of those who were with them. To stop this group, a group of supporters of Ratzinger began to issue a series of documents, which was called Vatileaks. I can say this shock, this war of [Vatileaks] documents led to the end of Ratzinger."

"... Ratzinger made... war against pedophilia... [h]e just started and resigned."
[https://www.comunidadeculturaearte.com/emiliano-fittipaldi-para-francisco-a-pedofilia-e-uma-questao-secundaria/]

But, getting back to Marshall, since he is being so magnanimous in allowing resignationalist Fr. Nix to, at times, co-host with him on his show, it seems that he should have a friendly debate on the open question on if Pope Benedict's resignation was valid or not with his resignationalist frequent guest co-host.

Hopefully, Marshall is confident enough in his facts against the resignationalist questioning of the Benedict abdication to not be afraid to debate Fr. Nix on the subject.

Also, maybe in the debate Nix will let us know who the "Cardinal... questioning" the "valid resignation of Pope Benedict" is.

Pray an Our Father now that that cardinal receive the grace of courage to join Bishop René Gracida in calling for an cardinal investigation into the Pope Benedict resignation and the Francis conclave.

 

13 comments:


  1. Called on the carpet. Bravo, Mr. Martinez!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Exposing one's face on camera hour upon hour has its dangers. Sometimes the MisteRogers mask slips.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Last week, during one of the Marshall/Gordon videos, Gordon said something along the lines of, "Although I guess I still believe Pope Francis is the Pope, I've begun to understand why people think Benedict may still be the Pope." He said it haltingly, but Marshall didn't grimace or cut him off. I thought, "Wow...things really have turned a corner." These two are very conservative in the "Company Man" sense of the word, so for Gordon to say that and for Marshall seem not have a problem with his say it is a really big deal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good to know. The only problem I have with the FiDP (Francis is definitely pope) crowd is their insistence that there's no real evidence to the contrary.

      Delete
  4. Debbie, I wouldn’t say that there is no evidence to the contrary, but that after all this time (2013 ... almost seven years now) the evidence is overwhelming, convincing, persuasive.

    We have to know who the Pope is. I have followed the evidence stream as carefully as anything in my life. As if my soul (and my family’s) depends on it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Aqua. I did not state well what meant.

      I think we all can sympathize with those who are not ready to believe/state Benedict is the true Pope. It's the FiDP crowd who pose the most danger, as they won't engage honestly with the evidence. As Ann rightly pointed out long ago: they're destroying the papacy, the Church and even Christ's promise.

      Delete
  5. Those who are so adamantly opposed to the discussion about the invalidity of Benedict's 'resignation' are those for whom such a possibility as Bergoglio not being pope is just too much to bear. They cannot tolerate the possibility that an antipope is at the helm because it would destroy their understanding of what a pope is and what the Catholic Church is. Their notion of the papacy is faulty and, for them, the whole premise of what Catholicism is would be destroyed if they admitted an antipope were reigning. They cannot grasp that being a Catholic is to defend the fullness of the Catholic Faith, not in denying the fault lines of the man at the top. They cannot grasp what real infallibility is and is not. Steve Skojec and others who scream loudest that the apostate Bergoglio is pope do not understand that they are undermining the importance of revealed Truth as the foundation of Catholicism.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good catch, UtaHagen. I didn't see that moment which you describe.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good catch, UtaHagen. I didn't see that moment which you describe.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Notes to C. M.

    Agreed Aqua. It’s the most burning question of the day: Who is the Vicar of Christ on earth. Truth is it’s own defense. It needs defenders only in the sense of witnesses to it, pronouncers of the truth if you will.

    The animosity—nay ferocity—with which such statements are greeted is astonishing. Look at how men react to Miss Barnhardt for example. Fury.

    To me there is Pope Benedict who has telegraphed in a hundred ways he’s still pope, even while recognizing there is another.

    Pope Benedict has never said he’s a former pope or the infamous recent quotation falsely attributed to him that: “There’s only one pope and his name is Francis.” Nor has Pope Benedict disavowed the Petrine ministry conceived as contemplation and suffering, thinking and writing. Most of all suffering.

    Who knows whether his relinquishing the reigns of power, releasing his hand from the tiller of command, wasn’t by design, whether divine or even his own.

    Let the Homosexual Network Strangling the Church take the levers of power. Soon drunk with same they will collapse. Let them reveal themselves. Have they not—led by Francis—brazenly laid claim to Holy Mother Church?

    This process of the revelation of depravity of the Homosexual Network Strangling the Church—of which Antipope Francis is clearly the head.... Well, well.

    Has it not been the most extraordinary thing devastating in sorrow that our Church has ever undergone? It is like a crucifixion.

    But to confront this truth is necessary. Thus alone may the purification of Holy Mother Church and ourselves begin.

    The Homosexual Network Strangling the Church necessarily rejects Mary of course, with a hatred rivaling that of their master.

    For out of her pierced Immaculate Heart the thoughts of many shall be revealed.

    ReplyDelete
  9. There is a picture on Non Veni Pacem of Our Lady, Undoer Of Knots. She is poised to put a whuppin’ on a black, hairy demon with a Lady sized stick. Calmly serene, she advances.

    The Homosexual Network is that black, foul smelling, hairy demon. He has his hands on one of her children. But the child reaches out to her and she has his hand in hers. The hairy fellow is about to go over the edge.

    Union soldiers advancing on General Thomas Jackson, after routing the rest of the Confederate Army at the battle of First Manassas arive at his line and stop. The comment goes back, there is Jackson, like a stone wall. That battle turned because of his troops’ discipline and tenacity. And Thomas Jackson got his nickname: Stonewall Jackson.

    Here we Catholics stand, like a stone wall, with Our Lady and Our Lord. The enemy cannot prevail.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Amen. A portrait of Gen. Jackson hangs in my barn. While I’ll be at post on that wall with a musty old rifle even were the Antipope coming to drop a nuke on my position I do believe the tide is turning. See e g. Bro. Alexis today: https://fromrome.wordpress.com/2019/09/11/how-benedict-has-defeated-francis/

    Nothing is impossible for God, and enormous power has He vested in the Rosary these days, as (the real—see RadTradThomist) Sr. Lucy attested in her last interview on St. Stephen’s Day 1957. No problem too large, she said, for the Rosary.

    Thanks for the words of encouragement.

    “There stands Jackson—like a stone wall. Rally round the Virginians!”

    —Gen. Bee.

    I’d suggest Allen Tate’s beautiful biography of Stonewall Jackson, eponymously titled.

    ReplyDelete