Recently it emerged that in August 2014, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI wrote a personal reply to questions from Msgr. Nicola Bux about the legitimacy of his resignation from the papacy in February 2013. The late pope’s response leaves no ambiguity about the validity of his resignation. In it, Benedict flatly rejected the “Benevacantist” thesis — that he had only renounced “the exercise of the ministry” of the pope while retaining the munus — dismissing the theories as ludicrous and the those who promoted them as unserious. He affirmed, unequivocally, that his renunciation was complete and valid.
In one of the publicly available portions of the letter, Benedict wrote to Bux, “The ‘authoritative historians’ and the ‘other theologians,’ in my opinion, are neither true historians nor theologians. The speculations they propose seem absurd to me. To say that in my resignation I had left ‘only the exercise of the ministry’ and not also the munus is contrary to the clear doctrine of canon law.” This provides a clear answer to a question that no balanced or faithful Catholic ever had to ask, so why are we hearing about it now?
An editorial in the New Daily Compass (the outlet that seems to have broken the story) offered one possible explanation, stating, “This letter, the existence of which was known but which had never been published by Monsignor Bux in order to prevent it from becoming yet another tool for fierce and pointless controversy, is of fundamental historical importance.”
Note that Bux has had this letter in his possession for eleven years. For eleven years — while the conspiracy theory spread like wildfire, while Catholics were pitted against each other over a delusional fantasy — he said nothing. In fact, he stoked the flames.
Consider a 2018 interview with Vatican journalist Aldo Maria Valli. There, Bux explored different ways of removing Pope Francis from office. He acknowledged that deposing a pope for “heresy” was complicated, since in today’s theological climate “everything converges and its opposite,” making it nearly impossible to “identify the exact contours of a heresy.” Acknowledging these “practical, theological and juridical difficulties,” Bux proposed another route: questioning the juridical validity of Benedict’s resignation. He openly suggested examining whether it was “full or partial (‘halfway’),” while warning that a “collegiate papacy” was “decidedly against the Gospel.”
As a better solution, Bux suggested that a “a thorough study of renunciation could be more useful and profitable, as well as helping to overcome problems that today seem insurmountable to us.” In other words—five years after receiving Benedict’s categorical rejection of the theory—Bux was still dangling it as a live possibility.
In his letter to Bux Pope Benedict wrote that an additional justification for the validity of his resignation was the parallelism “between the diocesan bishop and the Bishop of Rome with regard to the question of resignation,” which the late pope believed was “well-founded.” Yet in 2020 comments to LifeSite News, Msgr. Bux seems not to have agreed with Benedict on this point. He told Maike Hickson, “The comparison of the papal office with the episcopal office in what regards the abdication of the papal office is not correct.” Bux then delivers a convoluted (and clearly confused) explanation of the office of “Pope Emeritus.” (I explained the position in a 2023 article.)
Now, in 2025, Bux has suddenly decided to publish Benedict’s letter. The letter appears as an appendix to his new book Realtà e utopia nella Chiesa. And if you want to read the whole thing, you will apparently have to buy his book. According to La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, Bux claims he’s releasing it “to end confusion,” when he himself spent over a decade actively feeding that confusion. This is not a service to the truth. It’s a cynical rebranding effort.
Having exiled himself from polite society due to pushing reactionary views and conspiracy theories, Bux is one of the fringiest of the fringe voices who attacked and worked to undermine Pope Francis. Now he is trying to paint himself as someone who is trying to end the confusion in the Church? Obviously the role of schismatic apocalypticist has lost its appeal. Bux’s former ideological allies have hopped aboard the Leo train. What better way is there for Bux to reintroduce himself to the mainstream than to put an end to such an important and controversial debate?
This is just embarrassing. It’s a case study in the dishonesty of Pope Francis’s most hostile critics. For over a decade, Bux had the means to end one of the most toxic, divisive, and destructive conspiracy theories in the Catholic world. Instead, he suppressed the truth, fueled the lies, and now tries to sell himself as the man bringing clarity.
And here’s the kicker: not even this letter has convinced everyone, because when a falsehood becomes part of someone’s identity, they’ll twist anything to keep it alive. For example, Antonio Socci — author of The Secret of Benedict XVI: Is He Still the Pope? — has already published a response trying to preserve the Benevacantist fantasy. According to Socci, “Benedict XVI responded by evading the questions.” In his post, Socci admits that he has been in possession of the letter for two years.
This leads one to wonder who else had the letter. Did Cardinal Raymond Burke? Bishop Athanasius Schneider? Edward Pentin? Aldo Maria Valli?
It seems that for some Catholic fundamentalists, deception and suppression of information are par for the course.
This is a textbook case of the dishonesty that drove (and still drives) the anti-Francis movement. When the truth threatens their narrative, they bury it. When it’s useful for self-promotion, they trot it out. The damage is done, and no book release or strategic pivot will erase the fact that Nicola Bux helped build the very mess he now pretends to clean up.
Image: Msgr. Nicola Bux. YouTube screenshot.
Mike Lewis is the founding managing editor of Where Peter Is. He and Jeannie Gaffigan co-host Field Hospital, a U.S. Catholic podcast.
Popular Posts