Dr. Ed Mazza: Benedict’s Fundamental Error Invalidated

本站添加: 2026-05-27

[00:00:00]through the thesis of the substantial error. Francis was an antipope and Post is an antipope because Ratzinger never properly resigned.

[00:00:12]>> Hey my friends, we are taping today on May 20th. I know the show is not going to air today, but we're taping on May 20th, 2026, which is exactly the 10-year anniversary of Archbishop Gail Gensine, uh the former secretary to Benedict the 16th giving one of the most startling speeches ever. And for a lot of people, the key reason or one of the key reasons anyway why Pope Benedict could not have resigned, did not resign and retained the papacy. Anyway, uh with us discussing it today is Dr. Ed Maza, who has written extensively on this subject.

[00:00:55]This is definitely one of those shows you're going to want to stay tuned for.

[00:00:58]Ed Maza, welcome to the program.

[00:00:59]>> Thank you for having me, John Henry.

[00:01:00]>> Let's begin as we always do with Sign of the Cross. In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

[00:01:07]This is directly from Archbishop Gensfine on May 20th, 2016 at the Pontipical Gregorian University in Rome.

[00:01:16]It was for the presentation of the book Beyond the Crisis of the Church, the Pontificate of Benedict the 16th by Roberto Regali. So Gensfine, who was then the prefect of the papal household and Benedict's personal secretary, which he was uh right after, he said this, and I quote, "Since the election of his successor Francis on March 13, 2013, there are not therefore two popes, but de facto an expanded ministry with an active member and a contemplative member. This is why Benedict the 16th has not given up either his name or the white cassac. This is why the correct name by which to address him even today is your holiness. And this is also why he has not retired to a secluded monastery but within the Vatican. I found that stunning. It sounds like uh Gensine is saying that kind of like with the trinity there's only one God and three person persons. Uh it appears he's saying of the papacy there's only one pope but two persons in that rule. One a contemplative member, one of active member. Uh but I'd love to hear your thoughts, your insights on this ed.

[00:02:34]>> My first reaction was uh what you talking about Willis expanded Petrine ministry. Uh, a lot of people were scratching their heads after that one.

[00:02:43]He gives an explanation for why Benedict continued to be called his holiness, why he continued to give apostolic blessings in his own name, something that only popes do, why he continued to wear a report in the early days where they asked him why why do you continue to wear white? And the answer was, well, there were no black cassics available in Rome. In my book, the uh third secret of Fatima and the cenodal church, I reproduce an entirety in English translation uh Archbishop Ganswin's uh address. And man, there there are some doozies in there which I hope we can get into. But first, I thought we might actually get to the origins if you want of this idea of the expanded ministry because evidently Ganswine is getting it from Ratzinger.

[00:03:36]Where does it come you know in the early days of Ratzinger?

[00:03:39]>> Just before we go to that we should actually say that he does get it from Ratzinger and in fact Ratzinger Benedict the 16th. Benedict even makes somewhat reference to it himself. Benedict confirmed it if you will in uh describing his resignation as resigning only the active exercise of the ministry while remaining bound and as in his words always and forever to the patron office in a new way in the enclosure of St. Peter as he said here is the Vatican text from his decision. The real gravity of this decision that was to resign was also due to the fact that from that moment on I was engaged always and forever by the Lord always. Anyone who accepts the pra ministry no longer has any privacy. He belongs always and completely to everyone to the whole church. And he goes on, he says, uh, the always is also a forever. There can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this. He said, I no longer bear the power of office for the governance of the church, but in the service of prayer, I remain, so to speak, in the enclosure of St. Peter, St. Benedict whose name I bear as pope as pope he says will be a great example for me in this he showed us the way for a life which whether active or passive is completely given over to the work of God. So you can see that right there in Benedict I 16th's own explanation of uh his resignation. This was delivered February 27th, 2013. That idea is already there. So continue. You're telling me now that Benedict had this idea even before he was pope.

[00:05:27]>> Yes. And that's something that um Ganswine also uh brings up in his uh in his talk. He says that um I too am an immediate witness to that spectacular and unexpected step by Benedict I 16th must admit that for it I am reminded again and again of the well-known and ingenious axiom with which in the middle ages John Duncotus justified the divine decree for the immaculate conception of the mother of god decuit it fake it. That is to say, it was a convenient thing because it was reasonable. God could therefore he did it. I apply the axiom to the decision of resignation in the following way. It was expedient because Benedict the 16th was aware that he was lacking the strength necessary for the very grave office. He could have done it because he had long ago thought deeply theologically about the possibility of Pope Samariti for the future. So he so he did it. So he's comparing what Rat what Ratzinger did to John Duncotus' theology behind the immaculate conception. How God decreed the immaculate conception which is stunning. But then he also says that that uh Benedict had long ago thought deeply theologically about the possibility of this expanded uh Petrine ministry. Carl Roner was the darling of the seminaries back in the 1970s. But of course he was a a theological modernist even more progressive than at times Ratzinger was. But let me read for you a a quote from Roner in uh the early '7s where he where Roner muses about perhaps there can be more than one occupant of the chair of Peter at the same time. Roner just to give you the context for this quote. Roner is talking about during a conclave when the cardinals have the power to choose the next pope. So if then a collective authority uh a collective authoritybearing agent exists and is therefore possible within the church um even according to Catholic ecclesiastical constitutional law. Well, how might one definitively and certainly prove that according to this constitutional law, Yuri Deaini, such a thing can only exist in the case in which it actually exists today. That is to say, when a pope is dead and the college of cardinals elects a new candidate such that, for example, a presbyatorial council could not lead a particular church in principle or that the bearer of supreme petrine authority can only be an individual. That's ronor.

[00:08:36]Now, um, Archbishop, his excellency Archbishop Carlo Maria Vegano, uh, a couple years ago revealed that he was informed by Cardinal Walter Brambler that Professor Ratzinger supported Professor Roner's shared papacy idea.

[00:08:56]So, this is the quote from Vegan O. He says, uh, Bran Müller confided in me in January 2020 in response to a specific question of mine that Joseph Ratzinger was developing the theory of the Pope Emmeritus and a collegial shared papacy with his colleague Carl Roner in the 1970s when they were both young theologians.

[00:09:29]unquote. There you have the testimony of of Vegano via um Bram Müller and obviously Bram Muller is a German, Ratzinger was a German, uh Roner, right? So back in the 70s uh the the Germans had all these high fluting ideas of how we can restructure the papacy.

[00:09:50]In fact, even Francis admitted one day that some of these theologians think that the papacy is a sacrament.

[00:10:00]And he he basically says, you know, I wouldn't go that far, but I think it's interesting. According to church teaching, it it's impossible to have a shared papacy. In fact, um depending on how you word your uh theological statement, it's actually a heresy to to say so. And uh it was in 1647 that Pope Innocent uh declared this. I mean you can find it in Denzinger uh where the Pope condemns uh uh different notions of of a shared uh papacy. A century after that we have one of the great theologians of the church Petro Ballerini who uh died around the time of the American Revolution. uh he also explained why the papacy has to be an individual. Now, Cardinal Manning who was a great church leader uh in England in the late 19th century and who promoted Vatican 1 and the teaching of the uh primacy of the holy father and that the pope speaks ex cathedra you know when he's teaching the church he speaks infallibly he uh commenting on ballerini says that the the jurisdiction of St. Peter by reason of the primacy was singular and personal to himself.

[00:11:23]Uh and he goes on to explain how um this this is an individual thing and uh so it it's it's beyond the pale to try to come up with what apparently uh Roner and Ratzinger came up with >> couldn't make sense anyway. You'd think that if Christ were going to uh institute a papacy that could be multiple people um surely he would have done that with the apostles and not designated only Peter as the leader because you had you know you had all the apostles right there. Why why was Peter made one and only and yet that's what our Lord did.

[00:12:03]What are some of those other u indications that you're mentioning? So we have this as even a possible heresy.

[00:12:10]It makes sense logically that there could only be one pope. Why else have a pope?

[00:12:14]>> Exactly. And back in 2018, a a colleague of uh Ratzinger, manscior Nicola BS, he in an interview with um Aldo Maria Voli said that uh what you were just saying, John Henry, that Christ chose, you know, Peter uh he didn't uh choose multiple people for this. And so uh at that time with all the controversies coming from uh Burggalio BS thought that rather than focusing on the notion of uh uh a pope losing office due to heresy, he said that I think it would be better to research the legitimacy, the validity of the resignation of of Benedict. And in fact, it was after that interview that that I got started on the notion of uh researching um what ultimately became my book on the subject. As I say, uh the the Ganswin speech in 2016, it just it really opens certain opened the eyes of certain people on this subject. Um, but what's interesting is, and I like I'll give you I'll give you some more juicy quotes from the that speech at at the G Gregorianum.

[00:13:33]But it's interesting that a month later in June of 2016, um, in an interview with Paul Bada, I believe it was through EWTN, um, he actually doubled down, Ganswin did on this whole, you know, controversy.

[00:13:54]Paul Bada asked him quote if I understand you right he Benedict remained in the office but in the contemplative part without having any authority to decide as you quoted Rat Ratzinger's last Wednesday audience where he explains the reasons for his uh renunciation he says I no longer carry the p the uh power of the office for governing the church. So getting back to Ba uh so bad is talking to Ganswine and he says thus we have as you said now an active and a contemplative part which form together an enlargement of the munus Petrinum and Gwine responds uh that is what I have said indeed if one wishes to specify it is very Clear the plan potestas the planitudo potestas potestatis which is the full power the incarnate authority is in the hands of pope Francis.

[00:15:12]He is the man who has right now the succession of Peter and then there are no difficulties left as I also have said it. These two are also not in a competitive relationship.

[00:15:28]That is where one has to make use of common sense as well as the faith and a little bit of theology. Then one does not have at all difficulties to understand properly what I have said.

[00:15:40]>> Yeah. I I just want to read you this quote. This is from canon law and there's no working this out. So this is canon law canon 331. the bishop of the Roman church in whom continues the office that is the munus uh given by the lord uniquely uniquely to Peter that's the church in canon law saying it's unique to Peter it's singularly the the the Latin phrase there would be singular to Peter the first the apostles and to be transmitted to his successors even a Vatican 2 document lumagensium number 20 just as the office is granted individually to Peter the first among the apostles is permanent and is to be transmitted to his successors. This is impossible.

[00:16:28]>> Before we get to Benedict, let let's let's stick with Ganswine here. And Ganswin has a quote. He talks about what Benedict did as as something that that's un unprecedented.

[00:16:42]Um he says that it's the it's the office of the papacy that has uh that has changed. Therefore, as of February 11th, 2013, the papal ministry, the papal ministry is no longer what it was before. And yet it is a foundation that Benedict I 16th has profoundly and enduringly transformed in his pontificate of exception. And the German word is naman pontificat. Just so this could be confusing to the listeners. What Ganswin is saying is that in the in the uh three years since Benedict stepped down, Benedict has been conducting a pontificat, a pontificate, an naman pontificate. There's different translations of that word from the German. One of those translations is is is outlaw, an outlaw papacy. Uh another translation would be an exceptional that is to say an exception to established law papacy. In fact, John Henry there is no pope emmeritus in canon law. And if the pope wanted to change canon law, he had to do a rescript. He couldn't just uh you know just do this all of a sudden without you know changing law. But anyway, so it's it's it's very bizarre.

[00:18:12]time and again in his in his speech uh Ganswin keeps using uh hyperbole and and and he keeps um uh comparing this. He says this this has nothing to do with what for example Pope Celestine V did.

[00:18:31]Celestine V was the u was the last pope that sort of volunt voluntarily renounced the office at the end of the 13th century. And this is what he says.

[00:18:43]Um, Ganswine, but in the history of the church, it will remain that in the year 2013, the celebrated theologian on the threshold of Peter became the first pope emmeritus in history. Since then, so since 2013, he's speaking in 2016. His role, let me repeat it once again, is quite different from that of, for example, the saintly Pope Celestine V, who after his resignation in 1294 would have liked to return as a hermit, becoming instead a prisoner of his successor, Bonafice VI.

[00:19:26]Such a step as the one taken by Benedict I 16th until today had precisely never been there. That is why it is not surprising that it has been perceived by some as revolutionary or on the contrary as absolutely in conformity with the gospel.

[00:19:46]>> Your central thesis is about something slightly different but related.

[00:19:53]It is about the renunciation document that Benedict made on that fateful day in 2013 where he renounced not the papal office but the ministry instead having in the same document already referenced the papal office twice and knowing full well the canon law requires prayers for the resignation of a pope, the resignation of the office, munis they call it. Explain then to us how this belief false belief let's say in an expanded ministry sort of a trinitarian kind of concept. You can have more persons in the one pope than uh just like you can have two or three persons in one god. You're suggesting that that false belief or in expanded ministry might have exactly been the reason why he he didn't resign the office itself but the just the ministry of that office or of the of the power.

[00:21:04]>> Let me approach it by bringing in his statement. Uh, so you you were just referencing the declario February 11th, you know, when lightning hit the dome of St. Peters twice. Um, even the secular journalists were saying uh you have to wonder whether his boss really accepted his uh was happy about the resignation.

[00:21:29]What's interesting is that within the text of the declaratio uh when you you know translate it into English or if you read it in the original Latin he says my strengths owing to an advanced age are no longer suited to an adequate administration of the petrine munus. I am well aware that this munus because of its essential spiritual nature must be carried out not only with words and deeds you know administration but no less with prayer and suffering.

[00:22:11]Now, John Henry couple weeks later in his final Wednesday audience and again in in the book I' I've got all these texts and translated into English.

[00:22:21]Ratzinger says as you quoted earlier, I no longer administer the office of the government of the church, but in in prayer, I passively still exist within the precincts of St. Peter. Right? He just said in his declarancio that it's part of the munus to have prayer and suffering that goes along with the um administration. So did he am I hearing this right? He he he he insists that he's still in a petrine function through prayer and suffering.

[00:22:58]That means he still retains the monus right in an ontological sense. and and we can and he's been consistent on this point. It's not just his declario because well in the declario at the very end he does say that I renounce the ministry of of the successor uh of St. Peter and uh the cardinals will have to you know find a new uh successor. Um but in he's consistent both in his in the fact that in the declaratio he renounces the ministry not the munus and then in his in his last Wednesday audience he says let me take you back to April 19th 2005 the Lord gave me a ministry or the Lord gave me a um we know I I'll hold off on that until I have the text in front of me but again he says it's it's a forever what was done to him is is is is is an always and forever. Uh and and and then in in an interview Seawald, Peter Peter Seawald who uh fellow countryman of him, his a friend of his, this was from 2016 again just 3 years after the uh renunciation and Seaworld says to him is a slowdown in the ability to perform reason enough to climb down from the chair of Peter.

[00:24:24]Now, isn't that what I just read to you from Benedict's declario, right? He he no longer has the strength to to carry out the words and the deeds, right? So, you'd expect that the answer that Seaworld should get to that question is yes.

[00:24:42]But instead, Benedict replies, well, one can make that accusation, but it would be a functional misunderstanding. Again, the question was, is a slowdown in the ability to perform reason enough to climb down from the chair of Peter? And Benedict says, "Yeah, that's an accusation. It's it's a functional misunderstanding. The successor of Peter is not merely bound to a function." And I interpret that to mean uh, you know, the the day-to-day tasks, the administration, the words and the deeds. There's more to it than that.

[00:25:19]He says the office there's the word office moonus enters into your very being in this regard fulfilling a function is not the only criterion.

[00:25:36]So here you you have ratser saying that there's more than one criterion for being pope for holding for being part of the petrine munus. I mean it it it's clear as day here, right?

[00:25:49]>> How does this then spell out? So he does this. He has this belief which doesn't seem supported either by scripture, definitely not by canon law, and is novel. Here's Gensine telling us, yeah, he made something novel and new, but can it be done?

[00:26:11]And if it can't be, what does that mean for his resignation?

[00:26:17]And what does that then mean about the successors Francis and Leo? Before I address that, let me just throw one more sentence or two in here from Radzinger explaining how he understands Pope Emmeritus because actually I wrote an article about this that was published in in a very prestigious Italian uh law journal, the uh Archavio Jeritico. This is what uh I I I quote uh another interview that he had with with Seawald.

[00:26:48]And what Benedict says in his mind is that he was mirror mirroring by creating a pope ammeritus what the postconsil church did with the bishop emmeritus.

[00:27:05]And this is what what he says about um the new meaning of bishop emmeritus according to the church after Vatican 2.

[00:27:15]It does not create any participation in the concrete legal content of the episcopal diosisen office but at the same time it sees the spiritual bond between the former bishop you know and his dascese as a reality. He's speaking about what does the church mean by bishop emeritus.

[00:27:40]Right? Thus there are not two bishops of the dascese. But there is a spiritual mission whose essence is to serve from within from the lord in prayerful being with and for his previous dascese. no concrete legal authority anymore but a spiritual assignment which remains even if invisible. Precisely this legal spiritual form avoids any thought of a coexistence of two popes.

[00:28:16]So in his mind, well I I gave up concrete legal authority. I'm not claiming to run the dascese anymore.

[00:28:24]Therefore there aren't really two popes.

[00:28:26]Right? And he says a bishop's sea can have only one holder.

[00:28:34]At the same time, a spiritual bond is expressed that cannot be taken away under any circumstances.

[00:28:43]Now that that last line is what's key here because what he's claiming is that he Joseph Ratzinger has a spiritual bond with the dascese of Rome with the sea of St. Peter.

[00:29:02]What do we call that? The papacy, right? He is still holding on to an onlogical connection that cannot be there because if you renounce you have to renounce completely and and it's obvious from his repeated words that he did not even if he only sees it as a a spiritual thing. Now how does this fit into the question that you just asked?

[00:29:27]Canon law canon 188 says that any resignation in the church that is made out of grave fear >> a resignation made out of grave fear or that is that is inflicted unjustly or out of malice substantial error or simony is invalid by the law itself.

[00:29:51]>> The key word there is about the substantial error. Again, just trying to keep this simple for for the folks at home. When two people get married, they can exchange vows, but if if if they don't understand what it is they're doing according to the mind of the church, then the the validity of what they're doing is um is questionable. Right? So, over the years, Ratzinger has repeatedly said, "I resigned." Uh there there's nothing to see here. Manior Nicolabuks a couple years ago produced or says that he has a letter from Rat Singer uh saying that all this business about the Munis and Ministerium is just it's nonsense or whatever. I mean actually I'd like to know why if if Manior BS had this in his possession why he then told Aldo Maria Voli in the fall of 2018. I think we need to research the validity of of Benedict's resignation. But anyway, that's a side note. Here's the thing. I in order for any for a marriage or a resignation to be valid, it has to be freely done. Now, for something to be freely done, the the will has to choose uh something that the mind, the intellect has presented to it. And in this case, if the intellect of Ratzinger has presented something to him that is erroneous, the notion that you could, you know, have your cake and eat it too.

[00:31:28]You can give up being have you can give up the concrete legal authority of being the bishop of the dascese of Rome and yet still have a a a a a bond an unbreakable bond to the the sea the sea of St. Peter that would translate into substantial error >> and then that would uh sort of invalidate the resignation. That's why this is so key. So any way or you look at this there it's a real issue. Um I there's a lot of people trying to say that the moon ministerium doesn't matter. It means the same thing. That's proved that it's not true. The weirdest part is that the declaratio itself mentions the moon the office a number of times. But in that key line the only line that it would take to do it properly he doesn't say office. He says the ministry of of it and you're like wait what that's insane and then to know in addition that can law at 188 as you quoted says the resignation if it's made out of substantial error is invalid and if you realize well he had this idea which you're positing the church seems to posit is invalid is is an error that there can be this more than one person in the papacy but still call it one papacy but more than one person is novel like Gen Fine says but does the pope even though he's the pope does he have the authority to change what Christ designated a single pope a single pope being the one who governs the church and I guess it's your position No, he can't. What kind of evidence could they furnish that would say, hey, the pope has the authority. He's given the keys. What he binds on earth is bound in heaven, loose on earth, loosees heaven. Why can't he just make the decision to just change it? I can quote uh Ratzinger himself if I can find it here stating when he first became pope I believe it was at his inaugural uh mass and he explains that the nature of of the papacy is such that one can't simply just do or change it's not the role of of the successor of Peter to change anything it's the role of the successor of Peter to continue to hand on what was given to him The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law.

[00:34:15]On the contrary, the Pope's ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the church to obedience to God's word in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down and every form of opportunism.

[00:34:40]The Pope knows that in his important decisions, he is bound to the great community of faith of all times to the binding interpretations that have developed throughout the church's pilgrimage.

[00:34:55]Thus, his power is not being above but at the service of the word of God. It is incumbent upon him to ensure that this word continues to be present in its greatness and to resound in its purity so that it is not torn to pieces by continuous changes in usage. And this is a quote from my other book that just came out um saints versus antipostes.

[00:35:26]And John Henry I think this is important for a couple of of reasons. One, it shows that as confused in his thinking as Ratzinger apparently was on host of issues, he still had a commitment to the unchanging magisterium of the church that goes back 2,000 years. I don't mean to be uncharitable, but uh you truth and charity. This is where the 1958 state of econists go off the rails because in order to be a a heretic and therefore in order to lose your office uh you actually it's it's not enough just to be stating heresy. You also have to reject the magisterium of the church which is is something that uh I could give you quote after quote after quote. Ratzinger never did and and John Paul II or Paul V 6 for that matter uh never did. Of course, Burggalio and Pvost uh is much more dubious and is probably uh material for another show.

[00:36:32]>> Hey my friends, it's going to be an historic night. On September the 24th, Archbishop Fulton Sheen will be beatified in St. Louis. That same evening, LifeSight News is hosting a special celebratory banquet just steps from the stadium. We will have Bishop Sheen's own favorite miter with us for veneration. Come celebrate Blessed Fton Sheen with Bishop Joseph Strickland, lifelong Sheen promoters Terry Barber and Peter Howard. Hotel rooms are already very difficult to find. Most are already booked, but LifeSight has secured a block of rooms for those who join us for the dinner. Reserve your seats today. The link is below. We'll see you in St. Louis. So we have this situation in the church now for 13 years more than 13 years 10 years from which uh Gensine gives this bombshell because it's hinted at in the in the explanation in in Benedict's own explanation but it's not as clear as this. This becomes crystal clear with Gensvine and then everything starts to fall into place.

[00:37:48]You've heard about the story we broke a few weeks ago now. The uh Vatican criminal court, the promoter of justice actually having taken up the petition, the legal petition from Andrea Chianshi, one of the uh Italian journalists who's been pursuing this now for many years.

[00:38:07]He's gone his book, The Ratzinger Code, I'm sure you know very well. But his theory differs from yours in some ways, but there's a similar vein in that you're both focusing on this renunciation improperly done. He would suggest he did it connivingly for a good reason uh to to uh give hints and and still retain and and do like a basically a job to thwart the enemies of the church. But is your suggestion that he did it out of a substantial error because he had this false idea as we know from uh Vegano's testimony of what Cardinal Brandt Miller told him uh that they were already cooking up something with Carl Roner uh Roner being if you look into Ron you'll know the these are the precursors to the leftist bishops in the church. So >> the godfather of the Solan mafia >> yes indeed you have this going on. So he had this kind of mistaken notion, brings it forward, acts on it, but that would all by itself invalidate the resignation. Anyway, so it's a it's a very interesting thesis. Well, my question to you is here we are 13 years plus later, 10 years plus later after after uh acknowledgement of it. Um, have you had any um, people in power take this up from you, cardinals, bishops uh, of note who have something to do about it? I know that Archbishop Young Palanga believes this.

[00:39:38]I know that the now late as of a few weeks ago uh, Bishop Gracida knew this.

[00:39:45]I know that Archbishop Vegano uh, believes this. So there are some bishops for sure who have believed that your thesis and or uh Andreas or others are evident that it's evident therefore that um Francis and Leo are not legitimate popes but and and that the resignation wasn't valid. His Excellency Carlo Maria Vegano was very kind um regarding my my latest book saints versus antipopes to say that he found it extremely interesting and I agree with your analysis of the current crisis in the church. So I was very grateful to to to get that from him. What I have found is that there are priests who uh agree with the fact that uh e one way or the other either through the Andrea Chiani thesis or through the thesis of the substantial error Francis was an antipope and post is an antipope uh because Ratzinger never uh properly resigned in the eyes of God. But they're they're not able to say that. You know, one very good priest told me, um, it's it's your job as an historian to talk about these things. And indeed, uh, John Henry, believe it or not, just over the last hundred years, the actual list of 265 popes has changed as historians have debated whether or not certain popes were actually antipes and whether certain antipopes were actually popes.

[00:41:18]Um there for there's a famous example of uh Pope Liberius uh possibly going over to Aryanism and reject renouncing uh St. Athanasius and Felix II becoming uh pope uh in hisstead and there's there's been a lot of ink spilled on that and then there are some uh I think we've made some headway for example Andrea Chiani because of his dogged pursuit of things as you say finally got the Vatican to open an active criminal investigation of Benedict's resignation. There's a professor Geraldina Bony um she actually came out with a very lengthy article criticizing the position of Father Farre who you interviewed a year and a half ago uh and Andrea Chiani uh it's in a Italian journal called the Daily Compass. I guess that's how you translate it in English. uh she felt the need to actually do a a very lengthy scholarly article to re to rebut the um the impeded sea thesis. She was very kind in allowing me to get my peer-reviewed article published in her journal.

[00:42:29]So, she didn't dismiss my article. She she published it. Um and I think it's because in that in that article and and again I I repeated in the book uh the third secret of Fatima and the cenotal church volume one Benedict's resignation there are many authors particularly Italians who have found what what what we have discussed today that it it does seem from Ratzinger's writings that he believes in a a sort of an ontological papal residuum which endures in him or you know we should now speak in the past tense I guess because he uh he went to his eternal reward New Year's Eve uh 2023 I guess it was respected people in the church are taking this uh seriously even if some elements of uh traditional Catholics uh look at this as uh you know faking the moon landing or something.

[00:43:30]No, Ed, I really need to commend you as well because your latest book, the uh saints versus antipopes, um was very consoling to me in in fact, it it I think helps the church at this time because one of the things that you bring out very well there and has been very consoling is that saints fought one another over the very same issues that we're dealing with now. uh you bring out in your book so well Katherine of Sienna and her opposition to St. Vincent Ferret who was backing the wrong Pope and it's stunning because she is a lay woman, uneducated lay woman is up against this prelet who is not only is he a priest but he's running around doing miracles. And so here she has to go up against this guy who's raising the dead and is a priest and at a time when priests were so respected like anything.

[00:44:26]and um she's got to say um you're wrong and that's not the pope you're backing twice by the way. Um but what I love about it is it gives us a good navigating pathway because there's a lot of Catholics now who agree who disagree.

[00:44:46]That doesn't mean they're not holy Catholics. It doesn't mean they're not saints.

[00:44:51]all of the epithets because there are there's not a lot of passion in this in these defenses. But there are some who condemn those who ask questions or take positions like yours as heretics, as uh uh uh you know, anti-atholics, as persecutors of the faith. Let me just say with regard to you uh and your writings and your faith, nothing could be further from the truth. You're a very faithful Catholic yourself and uh I think your work has really uh both in in your thesis but also uh in your latest book about how the saints dealt with the situation that we're in uh has been a real gift to the church.

[00:45:36]>> Thank you, John Henry. Thank you so much. Uh we're I'm just trying to, you know, do the will of God and promote the triumph of the immaculate heart of Mary because as as you know, we're it's crunch time. We're we're we're nearly a hundred years to the the day she asked for the consecration of Russia to her immaculate heart. And uh if if if the request of our Lord for the consecration of the sacred heart to France is anything to go by um we're in a little trouble 3 years post 3 years from now.

[00:46:05]>> For me that's the most hopeful thing. A lot of people ask me how in the world can you not be depressed uh when all this is going on both in the church and in the world but I for me that all the worldly stuff is just downstream from the church anyway. But uh it's because I totally believe in the triumph of the immaculate heart. It's coming and it's not going to be long from now. So, and I all of this craziness is sort of like stepping stones. Yep. We're obviously getting closer. She did say, by the way, it will be done. It will be done late, but it will be done. And uh so, we don't know if it's going to be exactly three years or what, but anyway, we'll see. It certainly was uh 3 years uh excuse me 100 years to the day uh for Margaret Mary Lak and when our Lord made that reference in 31 telling telling sister Lucy that they're following in the footsteps of the king of France certainly uh was a little timeline uh at least in my books >> for those that are interested I'm going to do a deep dive into that on Friday June 12th which is disclosure day when the alien deception when the alien movie is coming out but we're going to do a a webinar are at edundmaza.com to talk about the disclosure of the sacred heart. Uh and that's the feast of the sacred heart. So that's the that's the disclosure day for Catholics.

[00:47:22]>> Ed Maza, thank you so much for joining us and God bless you.

[00:47:24]>> God bless you, D >> and God bless all of you and we'll see you next time.

[00:47:32]>> Hi, I'm Liz Yor. I'm really urging all the audience to continue to follow life site news for all information news about life for a great perspective on all the breaking news in the world. Thank you for watching and continue to watch and follow Lifeight News. Lifeight News is thrilled to announce our annual road life forum taking place over two incredible days this November. Welcome to Fatima, Portugal. Home to one of the most important Marian apparitions of our time. Imagine spending a few days in the heart of Portugal. Walk in the footsteps of the three little shepherds, Sister Luchia, Justinta, and Francisco MTO in the places where our lady appeared. How would you like to combine this premier event with a trip to the famous shrines where the sun danced in the sky? Join us for world-class speakers, guided walkable pilgrimages, and live fat music right at the hotel. Most importantly, you can start the day off with traditional Latin mass in the chapel within the hotel. Make a week of it and come this November. Spaces are already filling up fast. Don't delay. Book early to secure our special rates at the Esivine Hotel. Don't miss the opportunity for a spiritual retreat and see you in November.