'Cum ex Apostolatus is still in force'—so said Abbé Henri Mouraux
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre's long-time collaborator Abbé Henri Mouraux believed Pope Paul IV's bull on a heretic pope remained in force. What should we make of his arguments?
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre's long-time collaborator Abbé Henri Mouraux believed Pope Paul IV's bull on a heretic pope remained in force. What should we make of his arguments?
Editors’ Notes
Readers of The WM Review will be familiar with the forgotten figure of Abbé Henri Mouraux.
Mouraux was an “independent priest,” and a friend and collaborator with Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. In the sermon for Mouraux’s golden anniversary of his priestly ordination, Lefebvre praised Mouraux’s faith and faithfulness, boldness and courage, and his refusal to cower under accusations of disobedience.
Mouraux left his chapel in Nancy to the SSPX, who have themselves praised his legacy.
Here’s what Lefebvre had to say about Mouraux, along with several texts about his life, thoughts and legacy:
But what might surprise some today is that Mouraux openly held that the post-conciliar claimants to the papacy were not true popes.
Previously, we have also provided English translations of Mouraux’s four articles addressing the thorny question of the validity of the new rites of priestly ordination and episcopal consecration.
'Are men ordained since 1968 priests?' Abbé Mouraux answers
'How long will we still have valid bishops?' Abbé Mouraux answers
'Paul VI's rite of ordination is invalid, copies Anglican rites'—Abbé Mouraux
'Paul VI's rite of episcopal consecration is invalid'—Abbé Henri Mouraux
The purpose of sharing these texts was solely for its historical interest, as we disagree with some of Mouraux’s arguments in these pieces, as well as the certainty of his conclusions. The historical interest is that these texts show the sorts of arguments which were current in the 1980s. It is significant for showing the different ideas that were espoused and tolerated in Archbishop Lefebvre’s milieu in the past.
For the same reason, and with the same caveats, we are presenting Mouraux’s views on Paul IV’s Bull Cum ex apostolatus officio, on the attempted election of a heretic as the pope.
There are several problems with Mouraux’s text. First, he believes that this Bull remains in force, whereas this is at least highly questionable. Nonetheless, it is true that the Bull expresses principles of divine law which are immutable, and that some of its principles have been incorporated into Canon Law. As such, these principles retain their force continue even if the Bull has been abrogated (as we believe).
Further discussion of more credible interpretations of the current status of the Bull is available here:
Paul IV's Bull 'Cum ex Apostolatus' on a heretic pope: Full text and comments
Mouraux also raises an allegation against Cardinals Gasparri and Rampolla, for which he provides no evidence, and may appear to make the common error of concluding that St Peter received the primacy after his confession of faith, rather than after his confession of charity after the Resurrection.
Paul IV’s Bull Cum Ex Apostolatus officio is still valid
Abbe Henri Mouraux
Bonum Certamen No. 124, Nov.-Dec. 1992, pp 10-11.
French text provided by Fide Post.
Who was Paul IV, and why did he issue this Bull?
On 23 May 1555, in the midst of the Protestant crisis, the Sacred College raised Cardinal Gian Pietro Carafa to the Sovereign Pontificate.
He was a religious (a Theatine) of iron will, possessed an angelic purity in his priesthood, and was a learned and energetic prelate. He would come to embody the Catholic Counter-Reformation against the heresies of Luther.
He took the papal tiara under the name Paul IV. On 15 February 1559, he issued the Bull Cum ex Apostolatus which, in absolute fidelity to tradition, forever set the canonical rules for discerning legitimate prelates from intruders.
The key principles of Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio
Two principles dominate the text, of which we reproduce the essential points below, namely:
If the pope cannot be judged by any human tribunal, one must nevertheless "contradict him if he deviates in matters of faith."
If the sovereign pontiff himself, before his election to the throne of Saint Peter, has deviated in the faith or has fallen into heresy, "his election is null, void, and without effect. His pontificate cannot be considered legitimate in any of its acts."
Here follows the translation of the essential passages of the Bull:
1. In assessing Our duty and the situation now prevailing, We have been weighed upon by the thought that a matter of this kind [i.e. error in respect of the Faith] is so grave and so dangerous that the Roman Pontiff,who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fulness of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith.
6. […] That if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:
(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;
(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation;
(iii) it shall not be held as partially legitimate in any way;
(iv) to any so promoted to be Bishops, or Archbishops, or Patriarchs, or Primates or elevated as Cardinals, or as Roman Pontiff, no authority shall have been granted, nor shall it be considered to have been so granted either in the spiritual or the temporal domain;
(v) each and all of their words, deeds, actions and enactments, howsoever made, and anything whatsoever to which these may give rise, shall be without force and shall grant no stability whatsoever nor any right to anyone;
(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power.
Available here:
Paul IV's Bull 'Cum ex Apostolatus' on a heretic pope–full text and comments
Did Paul IV intend his Bull to remain valid forever?
In the face of texts so clear and so conformable to tradition, let us reason and reflect. Pope Paul IV declares that his Bull shall be valid in perpetuity, that it is promulgated by virtue of his apostolic authority. The words he employs are precise and leave no room for equivocation. They are as follows: "We decide, establish, decree, and define."1
Furthermore, he does not invent anything. He is in perfect accord with the constant tradition of the Church and in complete agreement with the Gospel. Indeed, Jesus established Peter as the head of his Church only after making him confess his faith in these terms: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" (Matthew 16:13–19). And it is only after this solemn act that he becomes the unshakable foundation of the Church and receives the power of the Keys.2
Moreover, it would be illogical and unworthy of God to suppose that he who said to Saint John that he had "come to give his life for his sheep" could deliver them "to the thief" (John 10:10), that is to say, to speak plainly: to the heretic, to the demagogue, who has himself acclaimed by crowds devoid of religious sense, who mingles with the enemies of the Catholic Faith, and frequents their temples or their synagogues.
And yet, Pius IX discovered in the documents he had seized from the Lodges that it was precisely such a pope that Freemasonry dreamed of, in order to ruin the Catholic Church. Fortunately, God gave to his faithful servant Paul IV a prophetic insight, which led him to write a text that forever prevents such a calamity, for it releases the faithful from obedience to a pontiff who is not in communion of Faith with his Master, our Lord Jesus Christ.
Was Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio ever abrogated?
Saint Pius X had included this Bull within the body of the Code of Canon Law itself. Death overtook him before he could publish it. It was his successor, Benedict XV, who issued the promulgation. But, in the shadows of the pope, Cardinal Gasparri, imbued with the spirit of Rampolla, removed, before publication, Paul IV's Bull from the body of canonical laws and placed it instead among the canonical sources.3
A most grave substitution, the confidence of which was entrusted to me by a prelate of the Vatican. It is an act of betrayal. But an act that is perfectly null in law, since, as we reiterate, the Bull is nevertheless placed in the body of canonical sources. However, though the juridical effect is null, the psychological effect was and remains real among those who know little or nothing of canon law. Furthermore, for a law of the Church to be abrogated, a document must explicitly declare it so. This principle is evident in the first thirty chapters of the Code promulgated by Benedict XV. Now, no official document has ever abrogated Paul IV’s Bull.
Does Canon Law uphold Paul IV’s Bull?
The adversaries of Paul IV’s Bull, persistent in their opposition, insist that Pius XII issued a Constitution Sede Vacante in 1945, stipulating that "no cardinal may be excluded from the election of the Sovereign Pontiff under the pretext of excommunication, suspension, or ecclesiastical impediment; that all such censures are lifted for the occasion of the Conclave but otherwise remain in force."
The reading of this phrase makes it evident that the objection is without value. Indeed, it does not concern, as Paul IV’s Bull does, cases of heresy, but merely disciplinary censures. Moreover, this Bull was confirmed by Saint Pius V on 21 December 1566 by his motu proprio entitled Inter multiplices curas.4 And let no one claim that Canon 6 of Benedict XV’s Code nullifies all previous laws. For it only abrogates disciplinary laws that it does not itself re-enact, but it does not touch those preserved by the liturgy, nor laws founded upon natural and divine law. Here is the text:
"Si qua ex ceteris disciplinaribus legibus, quae usque adhuc viguerunt, nec explicite nec implicite in Codice contineatur, ea vim omnem amississe dicenda est, nisi in probatis liturgicis libris reperiatur, aut lex sit juris divini, sive positivi, sive naturalis."
(Any disciplinary law hitherto in force, which is neither explicitly nor implicitly contained in the Code, is to be considered abrogated, unless it is found in some approved liturgical book or is a law of divine, positive, or natural right.)
Furthermore, the Code reiterates, in Canon 188 §4, the essential principle of Paul IV’s Bull:
"Ob tacitam renuntiationem ab ipso jure admissam quaelibet officia vacant ipso facto et sine ulla declaratione, si clericus a fide catholica publice defecerit (4°)."
(Any office is vacated by tacit resignation, ipso facto and without any declaration, if the cleric who holds it has publicly defected from the Catholic faith.)
This is the teaching of Pope Innocent III, who declares:
A pope who falls into heresy and persists in it ceases at once to be a member of the Church, and consequently ceases to be pope. He deposes himself.5
Mouraux’s Conclusion: the Bull is still in force
Some have sought to evade these laws by arguing that they would have no application to a pontiff whose conscience is warped, who believes himself to be fulfilling his duty in teaching heresy or in mingling with heretics and pagans, even participating in their impious rites. Such an opinion is entirely false and condemned de fide by Vatican I:
"Si quis dixerit...Catholicos iustam causam habere fidem, quam a magisterio Ecclesiae semel acceptam tenuerunt, suspendendi assensum aut in dubium revocandi, anathema sit."6
(If anyone says... that Catholics may have a just cause for suspending their assent to the faith they have once received from the Church’s Magisterium or for calling it into doubt, let him be anathema.)
After studying this text, let any Catholic concerned with clarity regarding the legitimacy of the successors of His Holiness Pope Pius XII read their writings and examine their acts prior to their promotion. They will find therein the roots of the heresies of their governance and will draw, for their personal conduct, a conclusion firmly grounded in the Bull of Pope Paul IV. Furthermore, since a pontiff loses all authority if it is established that he erred in the Faith before his election, it is evident that if he propagates heresy as pope, he deposes himself.
HELP KEEP THE WM REVIEW ONLINE!
As we expand The WM Review we would like to keep providing free articles for everyone.
Our work takes a lot of time and effort to produce. If you have benefitted from it please do consider supporting us financially.
A subscription from you helps ensure that we can keep writing and sharing free material for all. Plus, you will get access to our exclusive members-only material.
(We make our members-only material freely available clergy, priests and seminarians upon request. Please subscribe and reply to the email if this applies to you.)
Subscribe now to make sure you always receive our material. Thank you!
Further Reading
Follow on Twitter, YouTube and Telegram:
The WM Review: It is far from clear that these words mean what Mouraux would have them mean. Novus Ordo Watch provide a more credible explanation of what this sort of perpetuity means here, in relation to Quo Primum.
The WM Review: To be specific, he becomes the unshakable foundation and receives the power of the keys after the resurrection.
The WM Review: NB: Mouraux does not provide evidence for these claims, which we have not been able to verify.
Cf. Bullarium Romanum, vol. VII, pp. 499–502
Cf. Dictionnaire de Théologie, vol. IV, col. 520
Dz. 1794
Pope Paul IV's direction to what we are to do about a heretic pope is in Cum ex, and it applies when the pope deviates from the faith, and it applies all the more when he is a raging heretic - he tells us when that happens that the pope is to be contradicted - - the greater the danger, the more he is to be contradicted. What he is preaching in Cum ex, is basic R&R.
In the 1st or 2nd paragraph of Cum ex, Pope Paul IV confirms 2 things; 1) that it is possible that a pope can be a heretic - and 2) what we are to do about it.
Cum ex Apostolatus ex Officio, I believe, is still in force...BECAUSE IT MAKES SENSE. My belief, however, means nothing in this case.
Still, Cum ex is evidence that 1) "universal peaceful acceptance" does not fix problems of heresy or invalid elections, 2) heresy doesn't need a declaration to be heresy. Even if it is not in force, you still can't say that Jorge is Pope.