Skip to main content

Taylor Marshall: "I am... Open to seeing Benedict was Coerced" to Resign

Today, Taylor Marshall on his YouTube podcast while claiming "I'm not making" the argument then made the argument anyway that "if you wanted to show Benedict is still the pope you would show coercion in resignation":

"If you wanted to show Benedict was still pope you would show coercion in resignation. That is a little hard to demonstrate... I am way more open to seeing Benedict was coerced."

"When you look at the ATM machines, the Vatican Bank, when you look at the cardinals in drag and all the this stuff, cocaine fueled orgy parties at the CDF and you look at all the things that were happening from Vigano up to the resignation and the butler. There is a argument if you wanted to make it, I'm not making it, but if you wanted to make it coercion seems to me to be where it is at."
(Dr.Taylor Marshall Show, "Cardinal Pell talks Vatican Bank Corruption," April 15, 2020, 56:27-57:29))

It makes me laugh, but Marshall who isn't making an argument, just made an argument despite his best efforts that Pope Benedict XVI's resignation was coerced and therefore is "still pope."

Of course, if I was making an argument, but I am not making an argument, if you wanted to make it (that Marshall was arguing that Benedict is still pope because of coercion) in the above Marshall argument, it seems to me to be where it is at.

I'm hoping that Marshall at some point, even though he wasn't making the argument, will agrue with his own
argument and show why from his argument he and others shouldn't have "doubt... for any reason," no matter how small, that Francis's "papal election is doubtful."

Theologian Fr. Elwood Sylvester Berry (1879-1956) who was a professor at Mount St. Mary's Seminary in Maryland wrote:

"Hence the saying of Bellarmine: a doubtful pope is no pope. 'Therefore,' continued 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 not make law 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, Page 229, Note 8 Bellarmine, "De Concilio, ii, 19)

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


Justina said…
Well argued!
Alexis Bugnolo said…
It is easy to see the possiblity of coercion but hard to prove it.

It is easy to see the invalidity of a renunciation of munus, rather than ministerium, AND it is easy to prove it.

Why does Dr. Marshall look for the hard way. Is he an intellectual masochist?

Or he is cleverly trying to keep folks from taking the easy route back to sanity?

Justina said…
Or is he fighting that most intransigent of opponents--himself?
Aqua said…
I have never understood why more Catholics fail to see the necessity of a valid resignation down to the particulars for it to remove a Pope from his Office as Christ’s Vicar for life.

It has always reminded me of my evangelization of my Protestant friends and family using the John 6 discourse on eating the divine flesh of Christ; drinking his divine blood. They take the Bible “literally” (they always say) ..... except for that. Explanations and logic do not penetrate.

Christ states “eat and drink *indeed*” three times. The language of Christ’s meaning is clear.

Most of His disciples subsequently leave because of the seemingly great offense. The physical evidence of Christ’s meaning is clear.

But, like the partial and thus invalid Papal resignation, language and subsequent physical evidence matter not in matters fundamental to the Faith when a battle for souls between God and Satan is at stake. Framing the argument differently won’t change anything. Only prayer will win battles like these.
Fr. VF said…
The name of the pope is not a dogma. The Church does not "teach" the name of the pope. Sedevacantism is not a heresy--and neither is holding a minority opinion about who is pope. Since the identity of the pope is not dogma, there is no basis for the endlessly repeated slogan that "only a future pope can determine whether a present pope is pope."
Fred Martinez said…
On Sedevacantism's heretical teaching that there has been no pope being since Pope Pius XII, please read Vatican I's teaching on popes will reign perpetually.
Aqua said…
Fr VF, that is very helpful and in line with what my SSPX Priest counseled me, in all your particulars listed here.
Fred Martinez said…
If you don't think Vatican I is a infallible Council of the Catholic Church in terms of dogma there is no need to read:

Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, chapter 1.

Aqua said…
@ Fred Martinez,

I submit to the Holy See and every valid Pope who ever occupied it. Equally. Under Christ. His single, chosen Vicar on earth.

There have been disagreements on *who* occupies it. And there have been antipopes accepted by future Saints over valid Popes.

There is now obvious error in the Holy See; departure from Christ, Sacred Tradition, union with prior occupants; a demonstrable rupture within the Holy See itself at the level of Munus and subsequent authority.

I submit to the Holy See in its God-given totality, and the authority of St. Peter, embodied in all the valid Popes who ever lived, together, in union with each other, in Christ and Sacred Tradition.

I believe that is the basic meaning of Pastor Aeternus.
The jury is out. The next few weeks will be interesting.

Popular posts from this blog

"Remember when Trump was up by 600,000 votes in Pennsylvania?": A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

  Matthew H @MattH_4America Remember when Trump was up by 600,000 votes in Pennsylvania? 1:07 PM · Jul 13, 2022 · Twitter Web App [] 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 collaborator

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

Alone Bishop Gracida openly proclaims "Resist!" & Actively Works towards the Removal of Francis

    "You cannot give Holy Communion to the abortionists, to the abortion promoters and providers, to the divorce and remarried. You cannot do it. St. Paul said you do not feed the Eucharist to dogs..."   "Right now they [the laity] are suffering in silence. They need to object. The laity, the sensus fidelium is that common sense among the laity who have accepted the magisterial teaching of the Church which is the foundation of their faith."     "Having accepted that when they hear something that is contradictory to the magisterial teaching of the Church, the sensus fidelium is a impulse that causes them to speak out and say no."     "That is not true. Don't say that. Stop! That is the sensus fidelium in action!"     "Not to sit and suffer in silence. That's crazy. That's weird. That's wrong. Speak up! Resist! " - Bishop Rene Gracida [ ] We are in the greatest crisis in the history