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.
7:11 AM
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.
8:34 AM
Fr. VF said…
Marshall is racking up too many examples of irrational arguments. A sign of corruption. Money or respectability over truth.
2:54 PM
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.
3:12 PM
Meddling Catholics said…
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.
4:31 PM
PGMGN said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
5:25 PM
Aqua said…
Sam Sham for the win.
5:42 PM
AMalek said…
Benedict was not forced out. Go to Barnhardt’s very detailed and perfectly logical explanation why his resignation was invalid.
8:56 PM
Not That Guy said…
Best comment ever.
6:21 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...
6 comments
Read more

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...
Post a Comment
Read more

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...
3 comments
Read more