October 21, 2026 (Steven O’Reilly) – A clip of a recent Spanish language interview of Fr. Charles Murr has been spreading on social media. In this clip, Fr. Murr — a well known Catholic author and personality seen on many podcasts – claimed that:
“…the resignation of Pope Benedict — which was forced, forced by men inside the Vatican…” (Source: HERE)
I have great respect for the work of Fr. Murr, and in fact look forward to an upcoming documentary based on one of his works. Regarding this quote, some folks on X or on neo-sedevacantist podcasts, such as the Barnhardt podcast (c. 1:26;00), took some encouragement from Fr. Murr’s statement, i.e., that he is moving toward their Benepapists position. However, in a latter interview on Robert Moynihan’s podcast (see Livestream with Fr. Murr, beginning c. 6.27) Fr. Murr clarified his statement, saying:
“I wouldn’t go so far as to say in canon law that canon law would judge it invalid.” (6:36)
So, Fr. Murr does not believe that Benedict XVI’s resignation was invalid. In fact, he specifically goes on to say he disagrees with Dr. Mazza’s theory (i.e., Ms. Barnhardt’s theory). Granted, Fr. Murr does go on to express his surprise that the Vatican is examining Benedict XVI’s resignation (emphasis added):
“I was taken aback when I heard that the Vatican itself, the Supreme Court of the Catholic Church is hearing that case. They’ve taken they’ve taken that case that seriously that it’s it was presented as a case and it’s being judged. I think I it’s being judged even today which is giving it much more freedoms than than I thought it deserved. I was wrong admittedly and I admit that I’ve been wrong a few times in life. But I think I think this this was really interesting that this case has gone all the way to the Supreme Court of the Catholic Church and it’s there right now. Therefore somebody or someone ones are taking this very seriously and are looking at perhaps not a total the total freedom of of uh of resignation or lack of freedom totally but of a degree of lack of freedom in that resignation. I think that’s what they’re that’s what they’re going to come up with that it was not completely free.”
(Source: based on Robert Moynihan podcast transcript, (c. 7:30 – 8;43)
Roma Locuta Est has previously discussed this Vatican ‘investigation’ in an article titled Vatican’s Criminal Probe of Renunciation: Much ado about nothing. Based on prior reporting, I think it can fairly be said that Fr. Murr has made an innocent misstatement. The “Supreme Court of the Catholic Church” is not looking into a supposed forced resignation of Benedict XVI, as suggested by Fr. Murr. Rather, the Vatican body involved is the Office of the Promoter of Justice. Benepapist writer and author of the “Ratzinger Code,” Andrea Cionci, submitted files to the that office over two years ago related to Benedict XVI’s resignation, and alleged Benedict’s resignation was invalid. The fact it received a complaint obliged the Office to make a preliminary investigation. However, Cionci does not allege Benedict’s resignation was forced. Rather, Cionci’s central thesis is that Benedict intentionally submitted an invalid ‘resignation.’
While significant aspects of Cionci’s theory differs from Mazza’s (i.e., Barnhardt’s) theory, their theories do share the same view of supposed and alleged linguistic and canonical problems with Benedict’s resignation, such as the use of ministerium instead of munus in the Declaratio. But, these are the foundations of Dr. Mazza’s claims, with which Fr. Murr says he disagrees.
The point being, the Vatican is not reviewing a preliminary case file that claims Benedict XVI was forced to resign. This is not what this is about.
Ok, but did Benedict XVI freely resign?
Roma Locuta Est has previously addressed theories as to whether various groups, such as St. Gallen mafia, the Obama administration, and or others forced Benedict XVI out. For more details, see my article titled Pope Benedict XVI Resigned Freely. In addition, I went into further detail to debunk the claim the Vatican ATMs were shut down to force Benedict XIV out. For this, see my article in OnePeterFive (see Benedict’s Resignation: the Question of the Frozen ATMs). I’ve also done a couple of podcast interviews on the topics (see HERE, and HERE). The bottom line of the articles is, Benedict XVI resigned freely.
We may never be able to prove whether an ecclesiastical cabal, or a foreign government, or some other actors did or did not take active measures to try to force Benedict XVI to resign. Nevertheless, we must keep in mind that two things can be true at the same time: (1) a cabal may have attempted steps to force Benedict to resign, but (2) that his resignation was still freely made regardless. That is the fact the Benepapists, and other resignation conspiracists neglect to consider.
There is no smoking gun which proves Benedict XVI was forced to resign. It is a speculation. On the other hand, there are lots of reasons to believe Benedict XVI resigned of his own volition.
In his Declaratio, Benedict XVI wrote that he was resigning freely, indeed “with full freedom.” Benedict XVI also said he was resigning freely in front of a consistory of cardinals. Indeed, Benedict called God as his witness, saying he had “…repeatedly examined my conscience before God” and informs us that due to “advanced age” he no longer had the “strengths” suited to exercise the Petrine ministry.
Then, again, during a Wednesday audience (2/13/2013) Benedict XVI repeated essentially the same themes, including calling God as his witness, i.e., having examined his “conscience before God,” and said he was resigning “with full freedom” due to a lack of strength. Nor is there any hint in his very last Wednesday audience that his resignation was anything other than free.
On more than one occasion after his resignation, Benedict XVI called theories, which claimed he did not properly resign the papacy, “absurd.”
Furthermore, in an interview with Peter Seewald published in 2016 – three years after his resignation, the former pope again made it quite clear he resigned freely. Responding to a question as to whether the pressure of the Vatileaks scandal led to his resignation, Benedict told Seewald:
“No, that is not right, not at all. On the contrary, the Vatileaks controversy was completely resolved. I said while it was still happening – I believe it was to you – that one is not permitted to step back when things are going wrong, but only when things are at peace. I could resign because calm had returned to this situation. It was not a case of retreating under pressure or feeling things couldn’t be coped with.” [Peter Seewald, Benedict XVI: Last Testament in his own words (London: Bloomsbury Publishing Company Plc, 2016), p. 23.]
Above, Benedict is explicitly clear that he understood he could not validly resign “under pressure” or coercion. Only after the Vatileaks crisis had passed, when “calm had returned to this situation,” did Benedict XVI say he could then resign. In sum, Benedict XVI rejected any notion his resignation was a “case of retreating under pressure.”
During the period after his resignation, Benedict did not behave like a man who had acted under coercion, or who lived under a threat. Benedict as former pope remained in communication with old friends, colleagues, and well-wishers; and he received guests. Not one of them has ever come forward to suggest that Benedict either hinted he resigned because of a coercion, or that he appeared to be living under some threat. Moreover, if Benedict has been forced to resign, one would think he would have told someone, or at least left evidence in his final testimony. However, there is no hint any where of a forced resignation among his friends, or in any of his writings, or a last testament (see Benedict XVI and the missing “Last Testament”).
Clearly, Benedict XVI said on multiple occasions he freely resigned, even calling God as his witness that he had examined his conscience before Him. Benedict called theories to the contrary “absurd.” Therefore, in the face of this evidence, to continue to insist that Benedict XVI did not resign freely would be to call him both a liar and a coward. Such an accusation is unfair, uncharitable, unjust and factually unfounded.
Hints of a Future Resignation
While, as said above, there are no hints in Benedict XVI’s words or actions that he was forced to resign, their are tantalizing clues he had perhaps considered the idea of resigning long before he actually decided upon it. For example, Benedict already appears to have had an interest in researching a papal resignation within a year of his election. Speaking of Benedict XVI, Monsignor Nicola Bux told an interviewer in 2023 (bold added):
“In February 2006, less than a year after his election, he asked the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts for an opinion on the possibility of the Pope resigning from the pontificate. Some theologians were summoned, including myself in my capacity as consultant to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Canon Law provides for resignation, provided it is done freely…”
(Ratzinger Code? Chatter, Rosa.Benigno, February 21, 2023)
On top of that, in 2009, we have Benedict XVI’s curious visit to the tomb of Pope Celestine V. Celestine V was the only other pope before Benedict XVI to have resigned the papacy due to a felt ‘incapacity’ to fulfill the Petrine Ministry. During his visit to Celestine’s tomb, Benedict XVI went so far as to leave his pallium – a symbol of Petrine authority — on the tomb of Celestine V, perhaps as a seeming signal of his intent to one day possibly follow Celestine’s example, i.e., to give up the papacy.
And, indeed, already in 2010, we know from a Peter Seewald interview conducted that year — a few years before the resignation — that Benedict said that if he ever lacked the strength to continue, then he would have a moral obligation to resign. Benedict said (italics added):
“Yes. If a pope clearly realizes that he is no longer physically, psychologically, and spiritually capable of handling the duties of his office, then he has a right and, under some circumstances, also the obligation to resign.”
[From Peter Seewald. Light of the World. published 2010. p. 39]
Here we have Benedict XVI essentially stating in 2010 the actual basis for his eventual resignation, as found in his Declaratio in 20213.
Final Thoughts
Whatever hidden plots may have existed among any number of potential malefactors wishing for or attempting to force Benedict XVI’s resignation, it is clear the Benedict XVI freely resigned the papacy without regard to those attempts. And, indeed, there are strong reasons to believe that even shortly after his own election, he was already considering a resignation as a real, future possibility for himself should certain circumstances develop with relation to his physical or psychological capacity to govern.
Again, Benedict XVI said on multiple occasions he freely resigned, even calling God as his witness that he had examined his conscience before Him. Benedict called theories to the contrary “absurd.” Therefore, in the face of the evidence, to continue to insist Benedict XVI did not resign freely would be to call him both a liar and a coward. Such an accusation is unfair, uncharitable, unjust and factually unfounded.
Steven O’Reilly is a graduate of the University of Dallas and the Georgia Institute of Technology. A former intelligence officer, he and his wife, Margaret, live near Atlanta. He has written apologetic articles, and is author of Book I (PIA FIDELIS: The Two Kingdoms) of the Pia Fidelis trilogy, The Two Kingdoms; and of Valid? The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. He writes for Roma Locuta Est He can be contacted at StevenOReilly@AOL.com. Follow on Twitter: @S_OReilly_USA.