Skip to main content

Why is Taylor Marshall now saying there is No Possibility that Benedict Resigned because of Duress thus Possibly making it Invalid?

Dr. Taylor Marshall in his new book says:

"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":

"[T]hose three cardinals expose moral rot, sexual deviancy, that is paired 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 Jan 1, 2013."

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)

Finally, one related example of what Gordon was talking about is "undue influence" in "will-making." Mary Randolph, JD, wrote:

"People who knew the will-maker well.... may be called to testify about what they know about the... undue influence."
(Nolo.com, "Undue Influence in Estate Planning," By Mary Randolph JD)

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.






Comments

Debbie said…
Interesting. It's only common sense that if someone is FORCED to resign and the situation/people which caused it still exist, one would publically claim he wasn't forced. It's not a hard concept to grasp. Truely, I can no longer listen to or read Dr. Marshall or Steve Skojec.
BrotherBeowulf said…
Agreed. Done with these two clowns especially Mr. Skojec. That fatcat 200k salary needs to be whittled down to size. Plus he’s savage to those of another viewpoint like the valiant Miss Barnhardt.
Fr. VF said…
Marshall is racking up too many examples of irrational arguments. A sign of corruption. Money or respectability over truth.
Sam Sham said…
Taylor is a well meaning Episcopal “priest” convert who should have studied Catholic traditional history and teaching longer and in greater depth. It is not all Thomas Aquinas, Taylor. Skojec, however, is an arrogant effete fop and a subject of scorn for true traditional Catholics not intent on gaining clicks to make a living far beyond his intellectual capacity.
I think this is the TnT video clip you're looking for: https://youtu.be/KaH02cUCgYE?t=3432

For a smart guy, Taylor has a shockingly hard time grasping the simple concept that a man with a gun to his head cannot always be taken at his word.
PGMGN said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aqua said…
Sam Sham for the win.
AMalek said…
Benedict was not forced out. Go to Barnhardt’s very detailed and perfectly logical explanation why his resignation was invalid.
Not That Guy said…
Best comment ever.

Popular posts from this blog

Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Francis teaches HERESY," now, the question is will he do a Skojec & a Schneider Cop Out

    Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation: "[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic , he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him , or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See." (The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306) Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Pope Francis teaches HERESY: Pope Pius XII condemned the heresy of Francis": Pope Francis on Feb 2 2022, taught, "that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature...who have denied the faith, who are apostates." Pope Pius XII taught the exact opposite when he wrote of those: "who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or b

Wernz-Vidal: "One cannot consider as Schismatics those who Refuse to Obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person Suspect or, because of Widespread Rumors, Doubtfully Elected"

    Pope Francis is tottering on the precipice of Hell. None of this means he isn't the pope, and such talk among the laity is scandalous in its own right. Not a single cardinal in that 2013 conclave has come out and said the election was rigged and Bergoglio isn't the pope, that he is in fact an anti-pope . If he is, a future pope can declare that, when Jorge Bergoglio will no longer be a pope. But if the very men gathered in conclave haven't made that public accusation,  anyone who is suggesting that better take into account that they too will have to give an account of themselves to Almighty God when they die . Such talk adds to the scandal of the "little ones," the simple, even potential converts, who, when they hear big-mouth Catholics on social media saying he's not really the pope, draw back from approaching the Church. Do any of us desire to stand in front Our Blessed Lord as the Supreme Judge and explain why, in our desire for more c

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk