Guerard de Lauriers Call Your Office!: Fr. Chazal States that Sedeprivationism Accurately Explains the Situation in the Catholic Church. Says, "I don't care if they call me a sedevacantist for it." Says, "That's also the whole debate since 2012".

Here is my email exchange with Fr. Francois Chazal about the position that he articulates in his new upcoming book about Francis, the Papacy, and Fr. Anthony Cekada.

By sedeplenist [I meant to say sedeprivationist] I take it to mean that a man has been elected legitimately to the papacy but cannot exercise his power or take it on because of the obstacle of heresy. Would you say this applies to Francis or not?

Dr. Chojnowski: Fr. Chazal's kind response. And by the way, unlike the arch laymen of Misters Salza and Siscoe, has been a perfect gentleman in this entire back and forth. Here is his response.

Yes, in virtue of canon law. 2264.
That s also the basis for us using supplied jurisdiction (canon 209).
It has been our policy from day one, and the Archbishop was much criticised for it.
It is obvious that the Church does not want Catholics to place themselves under heretics, because they will inevitably drag them towards heresy, or at least compromise. That s also the whole debate since 2012.
i really dont care if they call me a sedevacantist if i hold this principle.


  1. I thought Fr. Chazal was against sedeprivationist, as he explained in this conference:

    What was the evidence that made him change, or did he change and maybe he is giving the term a different meaning.

  2. Those who hold to the Cassiciacum Thesis of Guerard des Lauriers (aka sedeprivationism) incur the Church's anathema:

    Pope Pius IX, Vatican I, 1870, Sess. 4, Chap. 3, ex cathedra: “If anyone thus speaks, that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church… let him be anathema.” (Denz. 1831)

    A true pope cannot lose the full powers of the papacy. They are inamissible.

    1. No public pertinacious heretic can be true Pope, so that's not a worry.

  3. Timothy, the cassiciacum thesis states that the occupant of the Vatican is NOT true pope, he is merely “designated” by the conclave but has not power of jurisdiction to govern the church. In other words, he is only “materially” but not “formally” pope. Capisci?

    1. To Anonymous:
      (1) As Vatican I indicates, there is no such thing as a partial, defective or material pope, for supreme jurisdiction over the Church is an unalienable component of the papacy, and a man is either the Roman Pontiff or he is not.

      (2) Almighty God has arranged this world such that matter and form cannot be separated. Our world is essentially hylomorphic. Remove the soul (the substantial form) from the body (its matter) and it will never be reunited in this world - except by miracle. Similarly, a rock that has not the form of a rock is not a material rock, it no rock at all. The Rock of the Church is no exception.

      (3) The Cassiciacum Thesis presupposes that the Vatican II antipopes were validly elected. They were not, for they were manifest heretics at the time of their 'election' and the conclaves that elected them were hijacked by enemies of the Church. Therefore, even if this novel thesis were correct (which it is not), it would be irrelevant to the situation today.

  4. How would you refer to we Catholics who cannot in good conscience follow Pope Francis and his seeming or real heresies, his false spiritual direction, his Progressive and Protestant world view, and his hatred of anything Traditionally Catholic

    1. To Michael Dowd: There is no such person as 'Pope Francis'. No informed Catholic would ever use that term to refer to a manifestly heretical antipope who is clearly working for the spread of Satan's kingdom in this world. All others who call themselves 'Catholic' are in fact apostates.

      The Church teaches that heretics are automatically expelled from the Church by Divine Law sans canonical trial. If a Catholic is inculpably ignorant of this truth, then he is in very deep error indeed, and his conscience would not just be uninformed, it would be misinformed. For that reason, it could only be called 'good' in regard to the sincere and logical application of false knowledge to particular situations.

    2. I’d refer to them as Catholics.

    3. "AnonymousMarch 15, 2018 at 10:39 AM

      I’d refer to them as Catholics."

      Agree, all the technical discussion about Catholic gradations sounds pedantic.

  5. I'm sorry, I can't understand the argument because I don't see what the prize is for the winner. You are proclaimed the smartest guy in the life raft?!

  6. So, Father Chazal is waiting for "all theologians to unanimously decide" that there must be legal action before Divine Action? Really? What would "theology on his knees" Walter Kasper say?

    You would think Father Chazal would know better. How can a man of his standing be confused between Divine Law and Canon Law? Bellarmine summarizes the key theologians quite well.

    Here it is, and it's infuriatingly simple: God has already judged the public pertinacious heretic.

    Multiple warnings have been received proving the above.

    Because the public pertinacious heretic has been SEVERED from the church by GOD, he can now be judged by the church. If he were still a pope, he could be judged by no one, but because he has been SEVERED from the church, and being not a member of the body cannot be its head, (DUH), he can now be judged by the church. However,

    NO DECLARATION IS NECESSARY, so if there is not a single catholic cardinal left with the catholicity to make such a declaration, it really doesn't matter. God has already severed the man from the church.

    Seriously, why is this complicated? Father Chazal, backing off his earlier statement, is clearly covering his fiddleback with pretzel theology. That's okay, Father. We have learned to expect that from the paper tigers of the resistance.


Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Byzantine Catholic Patriarchate Excommunicates Francis for Heresy; forbids Priests and Bishops to Mention him in the Divine Liturgy.

Keep Reaching, Mel!: Had Sister Lucy Died by 1949? Is there real evidence of a Third "Sister Lucy"?

Was Opus Dei in Charge of a Sister Lucy Switch and the Falsification of the Fatima Message and the Third Secret? Will this Investigation Bring Down "St." Josemarie Escriva as well?

Quark Ex Nihilo?: Stephen Hawking's Flight from God

Declassified: State Department Document Reveals Plan by United States Government to Stop Election of Traditionalist Pope in the 1958 Conclave!

Logical Bear Trap? Canadian Scholar Publishes Thesis Which Declares Francis to be a Public Heretic and Having Lost Office, based on Filial Correction and Canon Law.

Archbishop Lefebvre Recognized that Gallicanism is Not Possible. The question of the status of the pope MUST be answered. 42 years and We Still Cannot Recognize this?

Trying to be "More Traditional" than the SSPX: Fraternity of St. Peter Goes Rad Trad for Holy Week. Vatican Gives Permission to Use Pre-Hannibal Bugnini Holy Week. BUT, still kneel for the Jews. Does this mean ALL BLACK Good Fridays Again?