Tuesday, February 11, 2020

Is Taylor Marshal saying Pope Benedict's Resignation is "ARGUABLE" therefore DOUBTFUL?

Today, Dr. Taylor Marshall in his YouTube video called "Pope Benedict Resignation 7 Years Later: LIVE Rosary PLUS Q&A" admitted that Pope Benedict XVI's resignation is "ARGUABLE," therefore it is DOUBTFUL, and if it is DOUBTFUL then the condition for the Bellarmine solution is triggered for an imperfect council:

"But think about it.  From my point of view, the way I understand it is, Benedict had all the tools, all the knowledge, and he quit.  He fled for fear of the wolves.  But if you hold that his resignation on February 28, 2013, is invalid because he . . . does make a distinction—it’s arguable whether he does make this distinction—that he resigns the ministerium and not the munus."

MARSHALL HAS (INADVERTENTLY, I BELIEVE, BUT TRULY NONETHELESS) GIVEN AWAY THE STORE:  back where he says it’s “arguable” whether or not Pope Benedict made a distinction between munus and ministerium in the first place. 

Marshall adds this thought as a kind of throwaway line, to imply that the whole thought isn’t worth exploring.  But what he has admitted is an absolute SMOKING GUN.  For if the resignation is ARGUABLE, then it is DOUBTFUL, and if it is DOUBTFUL then the condition for the Bellarmine solution is triggered and neither Marshall’s own perspective, nor yours or mine, nor Benedict’s himself, has anything further to do with the matter.  Having admitted that the terms of the resignation are arguable, Marshall has no logical escape hatch from calling for the bishops to take action himself, although he obviously doesn’t see that yet and did not mean to paint himself into this particular corner.  TOO LATE!
In simple words, Marshall said that Pope Benedict's resignation is "ARGUABLE," therefore it is DOUBTFUL, and if it is DOUBTFUL then the condition for the Bellarmine solution is triggered for an imperfect council.
Here is the Bellarmine solution:
Fr. Elwood Sylvester Berry (1879-1954) was professor at Mount St. Mary's Seminary in Maryland.

Dogmatic theology scholar Fr. Berry in his apologetic and dogmatic treatise which according to his introduction "was originally written in Latin" stated that according to Doctor of the Church St. Robert Bellarmine: "a doubtful pope is no pope... 'if a papal election is doubtful for any reason'" therefore a imperfect council of bishops is needed:

"Hence the saying of Bellarmine: a doubtful pope is no pope. 'Therefore,' continues the Cardinal, 'if a papal election is really doubtful for any reason, the elected should resign, so that a new election may be held. But if he refuses to resign, it becomes the duty of the bishops to adjust the matter, for although the bishops without the pope cannot define dogma nor make laws for the universal Church, they can and ought to decide, when occasion demands, who is the legitimate pope; and if the matter be doubtful, they should provide for the Church by having a legitimate and undoubted pastor elected. That is what the Council of Constance rightly did.'" 8
(The Church of Christ: An Apologetic and Dogmatic Treatise, By Rev. E. Sylvester Berry,  Page 229, Note 8: Bellarmine, "De Concilio, ii, 19)

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.


Aqua said...

If for some strange reason a Pope wishes to be the sixth in history to resign his Office and return to his prior state in shame - for abandoning Christ at the highest possible level - you have to get one thing right ... only.one.essential.thing.right.

*Resign the Munus of Bishop of Rome, Successor St. Peter*.

And then go home.

Or - remain as Pope until you die or do so resign *Munus*.

Did he resign the Munus? Or not resign Munus?

Well, Dr. Marshall? Have you read the Latin resignation letter? Surely a man of letters went there first before drawing conclusions.

Answer: He kept the Munus of Successor of St. Peter.

English: For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter

Latin: Quapropter bene conscius ponderis huius actus plena libertate declaro me ministerio Episcopi Romae, Successoris Sancti Petri,

Resign and Munus do not appear in the same sentence. It doesn’t take a PHD to see that.

Debbie said...

He needs to address whether his assistance at Fr. Nix's private Mass last August was a schismatic act on his part. He KNOWS father commemorates Benedict, and since he accused BiP's of the grave sin of schism for attending Masses where "Francis" is commemorated, the least he can do is fess up. It's no small matter that he has led is followers to believe they're schismatics to believe Benedict is Pope. Man up Dr. Marshall.

Unknown said...

Here is an interesting article at katholisches: https://katholisches.info/2020/02/15/querida-amazonia-die-analyse-und-die-frage-wer-ist-eigentlich-papst/