Canon Law, Debates

A Debate: Was the Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI invalid due to substantial error?

7 Comments

Editor’s Note: This is posted for information. This does not mean any or all of its content is approved. Dr. Mazza is a Ph.D. in History, and Steve O’Reilly is a former CIA agent, who chose to put a Gladiator’s helmet in his office during the debate, as if to indicate that he is a former or current member of the Gladio Operation for narrative, political, and social control of Western Europe and the Catholic Church. I think that is all you need to know, to connect the dots here.

With Globalist Censorship growing daily, No one will ever know about the above article, if you do not share it.

7 thoughts on “A Debate: Was the Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI invalid due to substantial error?”

  1. Pingback: A Debate: Is Pope Benedict XVI still the pope? - United Push Back
  3. Pingback: UN DIBATTITO: LE DIMISSIONI DI BENEDETTO XVI SONO INVALIDE A CAUSA DI UN ERRORE SOSTANZIALE? – Revelation Virgo

  4. Dr. Mazza did a good job and mentioned the powerful declaration of Pius XII that a “material” heretic (without official Church declaration!) is not a member of the Church and thus could never be a Vicar of Christ. I think he also faltered on Benedict possibly not knowing what he was doing. Br. Alexis, I would like your comment on Benedict’s resignation statement there would have to be a new papal conclave.
    Dr. Mazza left (in this short debate) one matter which would all by itself deny “Francis” the papacy. The following three factors would to me force the conclusion that this impostor does not even believe in the papacy: 1) His refusal to allow kissing his “papal” ring showing his use of this ring is ONLY to conceal his plan to eliminate that “final authority” office in his New Church. 2) His omitting reference to himself as pope, while Benedict does use titles of the papacy for himself. 3) And the real clincher is what should now be obvious to all, that “Francis” is moving to place what used to be called “papal authority’ into the hands of his Apostate bishops.

  5. Since the evidence shows Benedict knew exactly what he was doing in resigning only the ministry of the papacy wouldn’t we most certainly be right in concluding that Benedict’s mention of a new papal conclave being needed was in his anticipated soon martyrdom as seen by St. John Bosco and even others more recently? Of course such an unclarified statement was also part of the need to mislead his enemies to remove from them any excuse or feeling of any need to immediately do away with him. They instead chose to give every appearance of friendship to cover for their plan to destroy the Church.

  6. Pingback: Hey, leading Benepapists, “if you’re ‘ad hominem-ing’; you’re not winning” – Roma Locuta Est

    1. Stevie’s upset that he has been caught with his pants down. Now he is responding with name calling….

Comments are closed.