"… A heresiarch is not worthy of the title of pastor in the Church.
Do what you like with me; I am ready to suffer all, and nothing
will induce me to change my behavior." —St. Hypathius

In obedience to Can. 1325, I hereby announce that my vote for David Bawden as "Pope" in the July 16, 1990 election was tendered without proper knowledge of the candidate's true intention and character and was therefore null and void. Beginning in September 2006, Bawden has publicly stated more than once on the Internet that his electors conferred first tonsure de facto by their votes, confirming his vocation as cleric, and "calling" him to the priesthood and episcopacy. Because his September 2006 statement was confusing and poorly worded, I could not be certain it was truly heresy until he made his second statement on March 7, 2007. In October of 2006, I began studying Canon Law and Dogmatic Theology to qualify this first statement and other things he had written at the time. Since September of 2006, I have been warning him that he is in error concerning his beliefs about the hierarchy, fitness for the priesthood and vocation. In December of 2006, I was accused of "judging the Pope" or the Gallicanist heresy. When I read his March 7 statement, I then strengthened the refutations I had already prepared. On March 30, 2007, the Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows, my husband and I withdrew our "obedience." Since leaving his sect, I have been accused of schism and heresy.

Bawden dates his "calling" to the priesthood and the "confirmation of his vocation" to the actual reception of the votes in the 1990 election, prior to his acceptance of the "papacy." In doing this it appears he was trying to say that before his acceptance of the election he became a cleric, possibly because he belatedly realized that he could not possess ecclesiastical office, or legally collect the benefices attached to the office without being a cleric, (Can. 118). In assigning his clerical creation to the voters, Bawden wrongly attributed to his electors the powers of ecclesiastical jurisdiction possessed only by diocesan bishops in charge of seminaries. This is a species of heresy called lay investiture. The Church condemns this heresy in DZ 960 and 966 (Council of Trent); also DZ 1502, (condemnation of the teaching of the Jansenists at Pistoia) and Canons 147 and 109. Therefore, Bawden became a heretic on July 16, 1990 under Can. 2314. Furthermore, he was ineligible for election having committed this heresy prior to his acceptance, before he became "pope," since acceptance alone makes an election valid, and one excommunicated for heresy cannot validly accept election as pope, (Canons 109, 219; Pope Paul IV). Bawden has no rational excuse for his actions. He cannot plead ignorance, for he himself wrote the sections on heresy and suspicion of heresy in the pre-election book, Will the Catholic Church Survive…? (pgs. 72 and 161). In fact the "Questionnaire" section of the book, containing an abbreviated version of the condemnation of lay investiture by the Council of Trent, was compiled by Bawden.

Profession of Faith
In overtly circulating these statements for public consumption, Bawden states that as his elector, I conferred upon him the equivalent of first tonsure, confirmed his vocation and created him a cleric able to receive ordination without virtue of ecclesiastical approval or examination. I vehemently renounce these statements and all that they imply, for they imply that I knowingly cooperated in his heresy. I, Teresa Stanfill Benns had no idea whatsoever that Bawden's equivocally rendered opinion in the work Will the Catholic Church Survive…? referred to de facto tonsure; therefore I was entirely unaware of his contrary intention in this matter at the time of his election. I renounce any appearance of concurrence in this election per his now clearly expressed intentions on vocation and de facto tonsure. I renounce the condemned teaching that vocation is primarily an internal call and that the laity can assign a man to the ecclesiastical ministry in any sense condemned by the Church. I renounce the error that a man can be ordained a priest without the requisite examination by the proper bishop. With the Holy Roman, Catholic and Apostolic Church I accept and believe that all that She teaches and has always taught and believe that all must be received exactly "in the same sense and interpretation." I accept Her Canon Laws, especially those enacted as safeguards to protect the common good, whole and entire without alteration. I believe with the Church that unless a man can be proven to be a member of the Catholic Church at the time he is (canonically) elected Pope, he cannot be considered a legitimate papal claimant. I firmly believe that Christ Himself granted the Roman Pontiff the charism of infallibility and Divinely guaranteed in granting this charism that Peter's faith could never fail. I likewise firmly believe that according to the infallible Bull Cum ex apostolatus officio, issued by Pope Paul IV in 1559, if at any time a man appearing to be Pope falls into heresy, he was never Pope and the heresy existed pre-election. I beg the forgiveness of any I have scandalized by my (good faith) participation in the election and promotion of the election in the 1990 book, Will the Catholic Church Survive…? But I wish to point out that there is no way I could have known Bawden's true intentions then without the clear evidence that has only recently come to light.

Accusations of schism
According to the opinions of seven notable theologians, in withdrawing from the "obedience" of "Pope Michael," no schism is involved. Vermeersch-Cruesen, Reiffenstuel, Schmalzgrueber, Ferraris, Vechiotti and Szal state: "There is no schism involved…if one refuses obedience [to a pope] inasmuch as one suspects the person of the Pope or the validity of his election…" (The Communication of Catholics with Schismatics, Rev. Ignatius J. Szal, A.B., J.C.L.). This fulfills the provisions of Can. 20 and establishes probability according to Church teaching. These theologians agree that one need only suspect that the man claiming to be Pope is irregular in some way or invalidly elected (Can. 2200), and we have established far more than just suspicion in the documents presented on this subject. The opinion of these men also constitutes the juridical certainty in way of evidence required by Dom Charles Augustine under Can. 430. What Szal presents, then, is a solidly probable opinion, one which establishes certitude, and according to the laws and teachings of the Church it may be followed at will. Consequently, no one may accuse those following their conscience in this matter of being in schism, since they are following a truly probable opinion. The Church condemns those as heretics who believe that "It is not permitted to follow a (probable) opinion, or among the probables, the most probable," (condemned as absolute tutiorism or rigorism by Alexander VIII; DZ 1293). And adopting this opinion is ruled as heretical. The first heresy Bawden engaged in, noted by the author in a private letter written to him April 13, was the denial that one can follow the most probable opinion in matters of conscience.

Accusations of heresy
As to the charge of heresy, it should be noted that it came only after I first expressed my doubts about Bawden's orthodoxy in April 2006, later questioned his denial of the absolute need for priestly examination as taught in Holy Scripture in September that same year and subsequently withdrew my "obedience" for his heresies concerning lay investiture March 30, 2007. This was after attempting to correct Bawden's errors. To deny that a reasonable person of average intelligence can correct a member of the hierarchy or even a true Pope is to contradict Holy Scripture itself, (see sidebar; Obligations of Superiors and Subjects). In fact St. Thomas says that superiors are in greater need of correction owing to their greater responsibilities. The accusation of Gallicanism does not and cannot stand.  One who does not believe a man is Pope can scarcely be accused of challenging the authority of the papacy; especially when the one accusing has himself long ago committed heresy and does not even possess membership in the Church. Nor can one be accused of heresy who suggests that a lay pope-elect, prior to his acceptance of the papacy, be examined for fitness. This because Canons 109 and 219 declare that a man becomes Pope only on acceptance of election.

Furthermore Pope Pius XII taught that unless he is fit for ordination, a layman cannot even accept the papacy. Therefore the acceptance of one without this required fitness would be null and void, and the layman reduced once again to a pope-elect. When it was realized that these charges of Gallicanism would not stick, another heresy was trumped up, one that cannot be truthfully substantiated by any of my writings or behavior. The choice of this particular heresy stems from an ingrained distrust, resentment and prejudice towards women, a problem often observed among various Protestant and other sects, but not among Catholics. Pope Pius XII had great respect for women. In fact his personal assistant, Sr. Pasqualina co-authored several encyclicals with Pius and was his lifetime mentor. His opinion in this matter then is important, both from a theological and a personal perspective.

Pope Pius XII on the dignity of womanhood
Speaking of the Church's role in restoring womankind to its original dignity in the address to the Federation of Italian Women in 1956 (The Pope Speaks), Pope Pius chastises those who would in any way ignore or downplay this role. "They never tire of complaining that the Church is actually bitterly opposed to the so-called 'emancipation of woman from a feudal regime.' They use false or fragmentary evidence and give a superficial interpretation of customs and laws which were inspired by necessary proprieties of the day; and they do this in an attempt to associate the Church with something that it has firmly opposed from its very beginning — that unjust status of personal inferiority to which paganism often condemned women…The real foundation for the dignity of woman is precisely the same as the basis of the dignity of man; both are children of God, redeemed by Christ, with the same supernatural destiny. How can anyone speak of woman as having an incomplete personality, or speak of a minimization of her value, or of a supposed moral inferiority, and still claim to derive all that from Catholic doctrine?" (!)

Women, equally with men, have been honored as saints and have worked alongside their male counterparts in many instances to receive their crowns. In way of proof, we have the story of St. Paul and his convert St. Thecla, St. Jerome and St. Paula, St. Benedict and St. Scholastica, St. Catherine of Siena (who dared to advise two Popes, one in an "intolerably dictatorial tone"), St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross, St. Francis de Sales and St. Jane de Chantal, St. Anthony Mary Claret, who corresponded with and drew inspiration from a holy nun and Pope Pius XII and Sr. Pasqualina. There are doubtless others we have forgotten. Were these relationships "mystical marriages"? Cohabitation? Gender envy? Hardly. For a true and unprejudiced view of the Church's attitude towards women in religious roles, see "Chiefly Among Women," sidebar at left. (This is a 1916 reprint from The Catholic Mind.)

Visibility and unity
St. Vincent Ferrar, like St. Catherine of Siena, lived during the time of the Western Schism. Here is a man who despite abundant supernatural gifts from God (including miracles) and proven intellectual brilliance in his Apocalyptic preaching, supported two false popes over the course of 36 years. It is sheer intellectual pride to suppose that any of us today could be exempt from error in such things if this great saint was not exempt. This is especially true given the present abysmal situation in the Church. The idea of holding a papal election was not only to provide the Church with the visible head necessary to Her existence (per Pope Pius XII's encyclical Mystici Corporis), but also to promote unity and reconciliation among Catholics and convert others to the faith. While certainly at least part of the fault lies with Traditionalist leaders, it takes a truly holy and humble man to succeed at such a great work. In 1414 St. Vincent Ferrar left the false pope Benedict XIII's obedience precisely because Benedict was impeding the unity of the Church by refusing to cooperate with the Council of Constance in resolving the schism. In essence, then, St. Vincent left because he felt Benedict was fostering schism. Certainly no one ever accused St. Vincent of committing schism by leaving Benedict, nor did they accuse him of heresy. While it is true that one cannot put the cart before the horse and expect unity without first establishing a visible head, it was the 15th century antipope John XXIII who called the Council of Constance, also confirmed by Gregory XII, (the true pope) before he resigned. That council was convened for three years before the election of Martin V on Nov. 11, 1417.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely
Nothing corrupts human nature more quickly than the sudden attainment of absolute power by an individual lacking the requirements of the office as set out by the Church. To this end the Church has directed Her laws and teachings, and God's Church will not be mocked. As Cardinal Cajetan said, "All this power is given to the Pope for no other end than the service of the Church. She is greater than he, not in authority but in worth and nobility. The papacy is for the Church, not the Church for the papacy; the end is always a nobler thing than the means." The Pope is the servant of the servants of God. Today more than ever the Pope must be a Christ on earth. Especially in times of crisis the Popes have been expected to go the extra mile and find a remedy for whatever ailments the world was suffering from in that particular age. Often, despite the reign of weak, evil or indifferent popes, or the interference of secular governments, the Church triumphed in Her mission. But this triumph rose over the bodies of saints and martyrs, theologians and preachers, also holy people among the clergy and the laity who were dedicated to sacrificing their own interests for those of the Church. If the Pope must be another Christ, his followers can only be the equivalent of the Apostles and martyrs. No other plan will work. When that day arrives, for all concerned, then the restoration of the Catholic Church will begin, but not until.