|Recent Featured Videos and Articles||Eastern “Orthodoxy” Refuted||How To Avoid Sin||The Antichrist Identified!||What Fake Christians Get Wrong About Ephesians||Why So Many Can't Believe||“Magicians” Prove A Spiritual World Exists||Amazing Evidence For God||News Links|
|Vatican II “Catholic” Church Exposed||Steps To Convert||Outside The Church There Is No Salvation||E-Exchanges||The Holy Rosary||Padre Pio||Traditional Catholic Issues And Groups||Help Save Souls: Donate|
Bishop Tissier De Mallerais of SSPX says that Benedict XVI has taught heresies and more
By Bro. Peter Dimond, O.S.B.-5/12/06-
Bishop Tissier De Mallerais of the SSPX recently gave an interview in which he discussed certain issues which are relevant to the post-Vatican II apostasy. I would like to offer a few comments about this interview.Bishop Tissier De Mallerais of the SSPX says that the concept of Church “communion” is an invention of the Second Vatican Council. This is completely wrong. All in the Church are in a communion of faith and government with each other. As we can see, this unity of communion is necessary by divine law in the Church. This traditional teaching has been touched upon in many Magisterial pronouncements. It’s not surprising that this SSPX bishop is completely oblivious to Catholic teaching on communion, for what characterizes the schismatic position of the SSPX is a failure to operate in communion with the Vatican II Church, the one it recognizes as Catholic. The SSPX claims that the hierarchy of the Vatican II Church is the true Catholic hierarchy while, at the same time, it refuses communion with this hierarchy in practice. This is schismatic. Thus, it makes sense that the SSPX (or, at least Bishop Tissier De Mallerais) would not believe in the concept of being in communion with all in the Church. “Communion means nothing to me,” Bishop Tissier De Mallerais says. Yes, we can all see that very well. Since he doesn’t believe in it, refusing communion with the hierarchy and members of what he deems to be the Catholic Church is obviously not a conscience-problem. According to Tissier De Mallerais, Benedict XVI is not a true Catholic. Yet he’s still the pope, according him. This is ridiculous. Also, just before the interview was about to end (of which I’ve quoted some portions), I found it particularly interesting that the SSPX bishop complained that he wasn’t asked any substantive questions. I found this to be particularly interesting because what typifies the false traditionalist movement is a dishonesty and a human respect that avoids the tough issues. That’s how the ridiculous positions of the false traditionalists have been able to be maintained and to flourish in these groups. At conferences, at chapels, etc., they avoid the hard facts (about salvation, about the heresy of the Vatican II “popes”) that cut through the lies and errors and illuminate the truth. People avoid bringing up these important issues because they don’t want to challenge their priests, speakers, etc. and put them on the spot. For instance, the late Gregory Hesse (although he was not a true Catholic) was at the point where he was repeatedly calling John Paul II a heretic, even at the Catholic Family News Conference. He was summarily dismissed from that circle and not seen to speak again there. Similarly, almost no one in these circles (SSPX, etc.) even quotes the Doctors of the Church who taught that manifest heretics would cease to be popes. If they simply did, many more would become sedevacantists. In this regard one must wonder why the interviewer didn’t ask the bishop how the SSPX can reject the “canonizations” of the Vatican II “popes”? Wouldn’t that mean, therefore, that we could reject any traditional saint? Of course it would. Or how come the interviewer didn’t ask about the arguments of those who say that Benedict XVI isn’t even a Catholic, since he has taught astounding heresies? So, to his slight credit, Bishop Tissier De Mallerais proceeded to chime in about Benedict XVI’s heresies on his own. Bishop Tissier De Mallerais blurts out that Benedict XVI has professed heresies in the past, but says that he doesn’t know if Benedict XVI still does. Is he unaware of Benedict XVI’s statement rejecting the ecumenism of the return (i.e., the necessity for non-Catholics to convert)? I really doubt it. Bishop Tissier De Mallerais says that Benedict XVI published a book full of heresies. It’s worth noting that the only heresy from Benedict XVI that Bishop Tissier De Mallerais brings up with any specificity is on the Redemption. But this is far from Benedict XVI’s worst heresy; in fact, it’s not even the worst heresy in the book that he cites, Introduction to Christianity. In Introduction to Christianity, Benedict XVI blatantly and clearly rejects the resurrection of the body multiple times. This heresy is clearer and worse than the passage Tissier De Mallerais cites. So, why does Bishop Tissier De Mallerais bring up, as his main proof, a rather obscure heresy on a topic that is harder to follow and which will be more easily responded to by the defenders of Benedict XVI? He could have simply pointed out that Benedict XVI rejects the necessity of Protestants and schismatics to convert to the Catholic Faith. Or he could have simply pointed out that Benedict XVI wrote the preface for the book The Jewish People and the Holy Scriptures in the Christian Bible which teaches that it’s valid to not accept Jesus as the Son of God. Not only does Bishop Tissier De Mallerais fail to cite one of Benedict XVI’s worst heresies – a simple heresy which would be very easy for all who read his interview to follow and understand – but he cites a deeper and more involved passage on satisfaction, which most of his readers won’t follow, understand or easily see. Notice that even the interviewer couldn’t follow. The reason that Bishop Tissier De Mallerais cited this rather weak proof, as opposed to a much stronger and simpler proof, is because he’s in a spiritual fog which lacks grace. It’s the same kind of spiritual fog in which many bad willed people are captured. This causes them to fail to hit on the main points, to miss the simple things. Frankly, the most important points are often too simple for puffed up individuals who consider themselves profound intellectuals. They must look for the supposedly deeper and more profound answer, rather than: HE SIGNED THE BOOK WHICH SAYS THAT JESUS DOESN’T HAVE TO BE SEEN AS THE SON OF GOD! OR: HE SAYS PROTESTANTS DON’T NEED TO CONVERT. That’s why, in my opinion, Bishop Tissier De Mallerais inexplicably brings up this issue of the Redemption as his main proof of the heresy of Benedict XVI, when they are so many others that more effectively, more clearly and more simply prove the point. Bishop Tissier De Mallerais says that Benedict XVI wrote a book full of heresies, including “denying the necessity of satisfaction,” which is “much worse” than Luther. So he’s a heretic then, right? No, of course not. So, according to Bishop Tissier De Mallerais, Benedict XVI has taught heresies worse than Luther and put doubts on the divinity of Christ; but he’s not a heretic or even “favoring heresy”! This is just ridiculous and outrageous. This interview is more nonsense theology from the SSPX.
Sign up for our free e-mail list to see future vaticancatholic.com videos and articles.