Bishop Tissier de Mallerais Letter on SV Thesis

[Bonaventure]

To: Fr. Paul Schoonbroodt


2/28/2009

Dear Fr.
I received your letter upon my return from the U. S. I can see why a priest or a
layman can entertain doubts as to the validity of a Pope such as J.P. II or Benedict
XVI; did not Msgr. Lefebvre entertain them? However just as our venerable founder,
I myself do not wish to make this legitimate doubt the main reason for my combat or
as a justification for my actions. My combat is based totally on the duty to defend the
faith as per St. Paul. As for him who is seated on the See of Rome: Because there is
a doubt, the presumption is in favour of the possessor; and since the Sede-Vacante
arguments are not accepted by the vast majority of the traditionalist Catholics, it is
necessary to apply Can. # 209: "in dubio positivo....juridictionem supplet ecclesia pro
fors tum externo tum interno." (in case of positive doubt... jurisdiction is supplied by
the Church in both the internal and external forums.); that is why the SSPX maintains
contact with Benedict XVI; of course, not to embrace his errors, but to convert him.
Please accept dear Fr. The assurance of my religious devotion in spite of all this in
Our Lord Jesus Christ.

+Bernard Tissier de Mallerais

[Roland Deschain]

To: Fr. Paul Schoonbroodt


2/28/2009

Dear Fr.
I received your letter upon my return from the U. S. I can see why a priest or a
layman can entertain doubts as to the validity of a Pope such as J.P. II or Benedict
XVI; did not Msgr. Lefebvre entertain them? However just as our venerable founder,
I myself do not wish to make this legitimate doubt the main reason for my combat or
as a justification for my actions. My combat is based totally on the duty to defend the
faith as per St. Paul. As for him who is seated on the See of Rome: Because there is
a doubt, the presumption is in favour of the possessor; and since the Sede-Vacante
arguments are not accepted by the vast majority of the traditionalist Catholics, it is
necessary to apply Can. # 209: "in dubio positivo....juridictionem supplet ecclesia pro
fors tum externo tum interno." (in case of positive doubt... jurisdiction is supplied by
the Church in both the internal and external forums.); that is why the SSPX maintains
contact with Benedict XVI; of course, not to embrace his errors, but to convert him.
Please accept dear Fr. The assurance of my religious devotion in spite of all this in
Our Lord Jesus Christ.

+Bernard Tissier de Mallerais

I'm curious as to what his Excellency believes the pope needs converting to. Is he talking about a traditional view of the Catholic Faith or the Catholic Faith itself?

This statement seems problematic on a couple fronts: either it is being implied that Catholicism comes in different flavors (traditional, neo-conservative, liberal etc) or that the pope needs converting to the Catholic Faith proper in which case, how can he be pope?

[LouisIX]

The theological stance that the pope automatically loses the papacy if he is, for one reason or another, lacking (or erroneous) in the Faith is only one possibility mentioned by the saints and theologians.

See Garrigou-Lagrange's stance on the matter.

[Kaesekopf]

The theological stance that the pope automatically loses the papacy if he is, for one reason or another, lacking (or erroneous) in the Faith is only one possibility mentioned by the saints and theologians.

See Garrigou-Lagrange's stance on the matter.

What is Fr GL's stance?

[Bonaventure]

The theological stance that the pope automatically loses the papacy if he is, for one reason or another, lacking (or erroneous) in the Faith is only one possibility mentioned by the saints and theologians.

See Garrigou-Lagrange's stance on the matter.

What is Fr GL's stance?

That he can be a heretic but still pope.

[tmw89]

The theological stance that the pope automatically loses the papacy if he is, for one reason or another, lacking (or erroneous) in the Faith is only one possibility mentioned by the saints and theologians.

See Garrigou-Lagrange's stance on the matter.

What is Fr GL's stance?

That he can be a heretic but still pope.

Funny this should come up again - I just talked to a Suscipe member off-forum about this not too long ago.  I referred him to this post:  http://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=1779.msg28379#msg28379

[Lady D]

I wonder if Bishop Tissier de Mallerais assumes that no sedevacantists actually assist at SSPX chapels when he refers to the "vast majority of Traditionalist Catholics". Many do, usually out of the necessity of receiving valid sacraments, and in other cases, convenience (distance).

[Charlemagne]

I wonder if Bishop Tissier de Mallerais assumes that no sedevacantists actually assist at SSPX chapels when he refers to the "vast majority of Traditionalist Catholics". Many do, usually out of the necessity of receiving valid sacraments, and in other cases, convenience (distance).

This sede does for both reasons listed - valid sacraments and distance. There are many more like me and my family.

[poche]

The theological stance that the pope automatically loses the papacy if he is, for one reason or another, lacking (or erroneous) in the Faith is only one possibility mentioned by the saints and theologians.

See Garrigou-Lagrange's stance on the matter.

Who has the authority to decide when the pope is lacking faith?

[Bonaventure]

The theological stance that the pope automatically loses the papacy if he is, for one reason or another, lacking (or erroneous) in the Faith is only one possibility mentioned by the saints and theologians.

See Garrigou-Lagrange's stance on the matter.

Who has the authority to decide when the pope is lacking faith?

Good question! I suggest you read up on St. Robert Bellarmine, especially as we celebrate his feast day.

[INPEFESS]

The theological stance that the pope automatically loses the papacy if he is, for one reason or another, lacking (or erroneous) in the Faith is only one possibility mentioned by the saints and theologians.

See Garrigou-Lagrange's stance on the matter.

Who has the authority to decide when the pope is lacking faith?

Anyone who knows the Faith has the competence to recognize that which is not of the Faith. Were that not the case, then we could never really know the Faith or recognize truth in the first place.  That recognition of what is or is not of the Faith impinges certain moral obligations upon the conscience, but not such that one must impinge it upon the consciences of others.

[Bonaventure]

The theological stance that the pope automatically loses the papacy if he is, for one reason or another, lacking (or erroneous) in the Faith is only one possibility mentioned by the saints and theologians.

See Garrigou-Lagrange's stance on the matter.

Who has the authority to decide when the pope is lacking faith?

Anyone who knows the Faith has the competence to recognize that which is not of the Faith. Were that not the case, then we could never really know the Faith or recognize truth in the first place.  That recognition of what is or is not of the Faith impinges certain moral obligations upon the conscience, but not such that one must impinge it upon the consciences of others.

I suggest you see what the Holy Roman Emperor, Henry IV, said about this subject in the 11th century. The idea of a pope losing office due to heresy, and of heresy removing a man from Christian society, is nothing new.

The Crusades had not even been conceived of when serious Christians considered the "sede" question."

[INPEFESS]

The theological stance that the pope automatically loses the papacy if he is, for one reason or another, lacking (or erroneous) in the Faith is only one possibility mentioned by the saints and theologians.

See Garrigou-Lagrange's stance on the matter.

Who has the authority to decide when the pope is lacking faith?

Anyone who knows the Faith has the competence to recognize that which is not of the Faith. Were that not the case, then we could never really know the Faith or recognize truth in the first place.  That recognition of what is or is not of the Faith impinges certain moral obligations upon the conscience, but not such that one must impinge it upon the consciences of others.

I suggest you see what the Holy Roman Emperor, Henry IV, said about this subject in the 11th century. The idea of a pope losing office due to heresy, and of heresy removing a man from Christian society, is nothing new.

The Crusades had not even been conceived of when serious Christians considered the "sede" question."

Certainly. Would you mind posting it for me?

[Bonaventure]

http://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=2395.0

[Mithrandylan]

John Lane wrote a short article on Fra Savanarola and the Borgia, Alexander VI.  http://www.strobertbellarmine.net/savonarola.html

Alexander is known as possibly the most immoral pope, but some of his subjects suspected him a heretic and sought to depose him.