Well, that didn’t take long.
Within hours of of yesterday’s cross-post from Fred Martinez, the Open Letter to Taylor Marshall, the following interview took place between Marshall and Dr. Edmund Mazza, a new and prominent adherent of the Benedict is Pope position. His position is nuanced, and contains elements which are new to the argument. The video is almost two hours, but it is well worth your time. I took notes, and will be publishing a timestamped copy of this when I have time. Much more to come.
Professor Mazza’s full thesis can be found here: https://www.barnhardt.biz/2020/05/27/guest-post-dr-edmund-mazzas-position-paper-on-the-invalidity-of-pope-benedicts-resignation/
2 thoughts on ““Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth””
Father Malachi Martin, reader of the Third Secret of Fatima in February of 1960, made several points during his interviews with Bernard Jansen and Art Bell. These are just a few of the more interesting statements he declared with respect to the visible institution of the Roman Catholic Church and Fatima:
Interview with Bernard Janzen in 1992:
Janzen: And your book, “The Keys of This Blood,” indicated that within Rome itself, there exists a super force that has paralyzed the governing machinery of the Church, even in the Vatican.
Martin: That’s right – that’s what I’m talking about. There is this force which is, at the present moment, irremovable – I was going to say undislodgable but irremovable is the better English word. And this is where again, one’s faith in Our Lady of Fatima comes in, ’cause she said so. And she said that, only I can save the Church, because that is what my son has willed – not because of her own choice, but because that’s what Christ has chosen. That she shall be the one to come finally and save the Church, before the final disaster. Because, if you read carefully what Our Lady told Lucia, you get the strong picture that things are going to get so bad, so many of the elect will lose their faith, so many people who now believe will finally give up in despair and commit suicide or be taken away by Satan as his prey, so much so that if she did not step in nobody would be saved … the danger is that today, because the magisterium has a muffled voice – the office still exists – it is a muffled voice, and uncertain voice, the churchman who are supposed to voice the magisterium have uncertain voices, they’re affected in their faith, they’re affected in their outlook, they’re affected in their performance through fear, and through what Our Lady called disequilibrium of mind. She said to Sister Lucia once, my child, don’t be surprised if the best minds suffer from an imbalance at a certain moment – wonk and waver. And because that is so, there’s a great crisis of faith in the Church, and there’s no point of recall, there’s no rappel to order, there’s no leading voice really talking in the Church today inspiring us all; it isn’t there.
And once that is over [Martin was describing a “passion, crucifixion and death” of the Church in the future. All the Fathers agree that the history of the Church will reproduce exactly the history of Christ] once Our Lady comes on her appointed time giving us the signal that she has promised to give us, then we can lift our faces to the East because it’s from the East our salvation will come.
Janzen: In our discussion earlier you just touched on the subject of Satan’s assault on the papacy. Perhaps we could have a brief discussion about that.
Martin: Bernard, if we didn’t speak about the papacy before the end of this conversation, I know that by the autumn of 1992, this year, you suddenly would be very angry and disappointed with me. By the spring of ’93, and well into May, June, and July of that year, I don’t think you would ever speak to me again because I would’ve let you down. I wouldn’t have brought to your notice what I think is fatally necessary for every Catholic to know, and that is the fate of the papacy and the coming stress and danger that we shall be without the strength of the papacy.
Bernard: Is it ever possible that the cardinals at a future conclave could elect a heretical pope?
Martin: [brief pause over the sensitive nature of the question] You know…they have elected men in the past who had heretical ideas. Two or three. They have never elected yet an apostate…an apostate. […] An apostate has rebelled against the very fundamental of faith and rejected God and Christ. We have apostates now who are papabili [men who could be elected pope]. Yes, we could have an apostate. But in that day, then we are into something terrible. We’re into something which, Bernard, is something that, if you think on it, in full knowledge of the meaning of your terms, is nightmarish. It would test the faith of St. Catherine of Sienna. It would test the faith of greatest saint. It would try the patience of Job. It would be a black day; a day on which you can clothe ever window in black and put out the lights and dress in sackcloth & ashes and pray that you’re spared because your faith is going to be battered to pieces…if that happens. ’cause then, they have the prize and everything goes underground. And we are indeed on our way to becoming what Paul VI, in his misery, called, in 1978, an infinitesimally small part of humanity. Completely marginalized and pushed to the side and forgotten as a quaint group of people as interesting as Tibetan astrologers on a modern campus.
Interview with Art Bell on May 4, 1998:
Martin: The prophecy of Fatima is not a pleasant document to read – not pleasant news. It implies – it doesn’t make any sense unless we accept that there will be, or that there is in progress – a wholesale apostasy amongst clerics and laity in the Catholic Church, that the institutional organization of the Roman Catholic Church – that is, the organization of parishes, dioceses, archbishops and bishops and cardinals and the Roman bureaucracies and the chanceries throughout the world – unless that is totally disrupted and rendered null and void, the third secret makes no sense, and number two, the other salient characteristic about it is that it means intense suffering for believers.
Martin: So, it was opened by John XXIII in February, 1960, and he proceeded to say that it wasn’t true; it was unreliable and the children didn’t know what they were talking about, and Lucia didn’t because when she got this supposed secret from the Virgin, she was illiterate – she was under 10 years old. So she couldn’t know what she was talking about. And John XXIII then, in his opening speech at the Vatican Council on October 11, 1962, referred contemptuously to the three children as prophets of doom and said, we today, we don’t have anything to do with these prophets of doom, because we are in a different age. And so he suppressed the secret.
Bell: Do you consider it to be the ravings of an illiterate child?
Martin: No, no. It’s a very exact description of what is now happening and apparently what is going to happen shortly, but in cold, hard terms. There’s no exaggeration, there are no use of adjectives or adverbs or anything like that. It’s a blanket statement. A very factual thing stated baldly with no adulteration, no flourishes, no purple patches.
Bell: In other words, they got exactly what they asked for.
Martin: Yeah, it’s a frightening document. It’s very frightening.
Interview with Art Bell on July 13, 1998 (the very anniversary of the Third Secret of Fatima)
Bell: Alright, here we go. Just a couple of things I want to quickly read. One from a friend in Australia, Father, who says, “I had a Jesuit priest tell me more of the third secret of Fatima years ago in Perth. He said, among other things, the last pope would be under control of Satan. Pope John fainted thinking it might be him. We were interrupted before I could hear the rest.” Any comment on that?
Martin: Yes…uh…it sounds as if they were reading – or being told – the text of the third secret.
Bell: Oh my.
Martin: It sounds like it. But it’s sufficiently vague to make one hesitate. It sounds like it.
Bell: Father, is there any circumstance under which you can imagine, that you would feel free to reveal the secret?
Martin: Yes. Yes. If there was a total collapse at the center.
Bell: And you anticipate that, don’t you?
Martin: I anticipate it as a possibility, Art. I can’t predict, but I anticipate it as a possibility, certainly, yes. I do.
Listened to most of the interview. What strikes me is the absolute INSISTENCE by both men that, against all logic and reason, Bergoglio is not an anti-pope. Sorry, gentlemen, but as smart as you guys appear to be, if Benedict is still the Successor of Peter, and maintains the Petrine Office, then call him what you will, he is, by very definition, an antipope.
Dr. Mazza is correct in his logic: if Benedict did, ontologically, separate the papacy from the Diocese of Rome, then Bergoglio is not the pope. If Benedict did NOT ontologically separate the papacy from the Diocese of Rome, the Bergoglio is STILL not the pope because whatever Benedict did, it was not resign the papacy. In either case, Bergoglio is an antipope…