Dr. Taylor Marshall: There’s been a lot of controversy. I think people see the crisis of Pope Francis beginning in 2013, and they’re unsettled. They say, well, Pope Benedict is the true pope; his resignation was invalid. Often, they refer to the Munus Ministerium distinction and say that he either accidentally or on purpose made a mistake in his resignation document. Therefore, Pope Benedict is the true pope, and Francis is an anti-pope. What do you say about that, Your Excellency?
Bishop Schneider: All these attempts are, for me, against common sense and evidence, because there are several proofs and expressions of former Pope Benedict who said that he is not the pope. For example, in his last meeting with the cardinals, after announcing his resignation, he said to them, You will elect a new pope, to whom I will submit myself and to whom I promise obedience. How can he submit to someone who is not the Pope? It is a contradiction, and it would make Benedict appear schizophrenic if he were acting this way.
In the last general audience, he spoke clearly that he made the resignation with full conscience, with freedom, and knowing all the consequences of this act. These are his own words.
There are two other proofs: in a letter he wrote in 2014 to Andrea Tornielli, a Vatican journalist, he repeated almost the same words from the general audience and said there is not the slightest doubt about the validity of his resignation, and it would be absurd to doubt it. This letter was published in the newspaper La Stampa.
Last year, in a conversation with a journalist from the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, Pope Benedict said, as reported by the journalist, “There is only one pope, and this is Francis.” I assume the journalist reported correctly. The Vatican news also quoted him, confirming this.
We are the visible church, not a church of dreamers. The superior has a presumption of validity, and the church does not judge interior intentions. We judge based on words and actions, the exterior, and the Pope’s exterior words are sufficient. He stated that he abdicated with full conscience and freedom. How he behaves now, resting as a pope or giving apostolic blessings, is another matter. His official words are clear: there is only one pope, Pope Francis.
If Benedict were truly pope, then all bishops appointed in the past seven years would be invalid, not in their consecration, but in jurisdiction. All cardinals appointed by Pope Francis would also be invalid. Cardinal Müller would not be a cardinal, and so on. It would be absurd.
If Benedict died tomorrow, according to their thesis, Pope Francis would not be pope, so the church would be without a pope. The majority of cardinals were appointed by Francis, so practically, the church could not function. No cardinal appointed before Francis would convoke a conclave, while Francis still lives and reigns. According to their thesis, for six or seven years, the church would be vacant, which contradicts the divine constitution of the visibility of the church.
Dr. Taylor Marshall: Like you mentioned, if Benedict, the sixteenth, Ratzinger, is celebrating mass and uses the canon including the name Francis, he is in schism with himself. How is that possible?
Bishop Schneider: Yes, exactly. It’s a good argument. People attending his mass hear him mention una cum Francisco, Papa nostro.
Dr. Taylor Marshall: Yes. And you were recently with Benedict Ratzinger, I think last year. There’s a photo of you with him. What was it like being with him?
Bishop Schneider: He was very sharp-minded and conscious, though bodily frail. He spoke with our group of bishops from Central Asia, and I was on his side, translating from German to the other bishops. He reacted vigilantly and consciously to every bishop. It was proof that he is very sharp in mind.
He spoke to me first, knowing I was German, and said a phrase that was very personal, which only he could know about me. It showed he was still sharp-minded. The book he wrote with Cardinal Sara on priestly celibacy was clearly done with full awareness and intellect. He was not being manipulated, as some journalists suggested. I witnessed this firsthand in March last year during the alumni meeting.
Dr. Taylor Marshall: If he were still pope, many of those bishops would have been appointed by Francis. Was there any indication in your meeting that he thought he was Pope or not?
Bishop Schneider: I did not notice any sign of that. He displayed kind, paternal behavior. Another hypothesis: if Pope Francis were to radically convert tomorrow and become a true zealous pope, say like Leo the Tenth, and began teaching correctly or proclaiming dogmas ex cathedra, like reserving ordination to males, would those who do not recognize him as pope accept this?
Dr. Taylor Marshall: Most of these people are wounded and confused. As a bishop, multilingual, highly educated, you see it’s very complicated. People want certainty, not fear or confusion. Believing Benedict is still pope provides comfort and stability, but as you pointed out, the consequences of this position are severe.
Bishop Schneider: Yes, I understand, and in some ways, it is a mitigated factor. The confusion is tremendous, but this position is wrong. People are avoiding the cross of this pontificate and creating a fantasy world with Benedict. It also shows a lack of trust that God is holding his church.
People should not focus excessively on the pope. They have the Catechism, the Mass, and Jesus in the Eucharist. They can do good works, penance, prayer, and spread the faith. In former times, people spread the faith without knowing the pope’s name. I would recommend abandoning the absurd thesis that Pope Benedict is still pope. It is a fantasy. Focus on living faithfully, offering sacrifices for the renewal of the church and the papacy, and God will accept this.