Bishop Tissier de Mallerais: a Man of Prudence

O God, who by raising him to the dignity of Bishop, gave Thy servant, Bernard, a share in the Priesthood of the Apostles, we beseech Thee, that he may be joined in fellowship with them forever. 
Through Jesus Christ, Thy Son our Lord, Who liveth and reigneth with Thee, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world without end.

R. Amen. 

From One Peter Five

By Kennedy Hall

I am grateful to Mr. Timothy Flanders for asking me to write this piece in honour of the recently deceased Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais — henceforth referred to as Bishop Tissier as he is commonly called — but I must admit that it is a daunting task to remember such a great man with so few words. The reader likely knows that it was Bishop Tissier who wrote the definitive biography of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and for those who have read it, that work is, without a doubt, as thorough as any biography could hope to be. Given considerations of length, this piece cannot be so thorough, so I thought it would be fitting to remember the man’s life in light of a particular virtue that he demonstrated in spades: the virtue of prudence.

Bishop Tissier was born in 1945 in France and obtained a master’s degree in biology before answering the call to the priesthood. He first encountered Archbishop Lefebvre in 1967 when Lefebvre was still the superior of the Holy Ghost Fathers. Shortly after, Tissier was part of the first group that began seminary training with Lefebvre when the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) was founded.

Much time has passed since the SSPX was founded, and doubtless, the casual reader will think of controversy and drama when considering the history of Marcel Lefebvre’s society of priests. However, what would happen in the decades to come was unknown at the time to both Tissier and Lefebvre. In reality, Tissier’s decision to join forces with Lefebvre was a courageous and heroic action. The period after the Second Vatican Council was chaotic, to say the least, and great uncertainty plagued Catholics the world over. For many, this period was a time of apostasy and novelty, and for others, it represented a time of “renewal” and “freshness” that came with great promises.

The ideological bent of the reader will surely colour perception of the post-Conciliar era, with devotees of the New Springtime bending over backwards to view things in a positive light and traditionally-minded realists seeing the period for the veritable chastisement that it has been. For Tissier, however, the consideration that concerned him most was whether or not he could find a good spiritual father who would form him in the ancient wisdom of the priesthood so that he could serve the Church for the salvation of souls and defend the Kingship of Christ. Given the humble beginnings of the SSPX, it is certain that he did not choose to follow Lefebvre for comfort. In fact, in the beginning, some of the first seminarians had to sleep in the storage room next to electrical equipment.

Given Tissier’s background in the natural sciences, we can assume that he possessed an analytical mind and paid great attention to detail. So, we must ask ourselves, why didn’t he find another seminary? Why would a young man with such a promising future choose the path of most resistance when there were so many other simpler and less arduous paths to take?

Surely, there must have been other seminaries and orders that could have provided him with sound spiritual and theological formation, one would think. Well, in his estimation, this was not so. Was he wrong?

Critics of Tissier would likely say that he was animated by pride or vainglory or that he was gripped by a type of hero complex. Of course, this is absurd, for pride was not a factor. For a man to be prideful, he must exalt himself above what he is; he must assign to himself and his actions a level of importance that is not proper to his station or state in life. There is not a trace of this in the actions of the young Tissier.

In 1974, apostolic visitors descended on Écone from Rome. It is very strange to think that in 1974, when the crisis in the Church was intensifying to a degree of epic proportions, resources were wasted to inspect the seminary of the SSPX. Could there be a more telling example of the absurdity of that time? Imagine that during a hurricane, the government would send inspectors to a building demonstrating its unique ability to resist the tempest, looking to find if the electrical wiring is up to code. It is this sort of incomprehensible stupidity that is typified in how Rome treated the Society in those years.

In any event, after the visitation, Lefebvre shared his Declaration that has become so famous. At the time, the Declaration was received like a bolt of lightning hitting the Vatican, as Lefebvre spoke of the Modernist and Liberal tendencies of the hierarchy and the theological contradictions of Pope Paul VI. However, today, Lefebvre’s words represent the beliefs of virtually all so-called Traditional Catholics and an increasing number of those outside the fold of Traditionalism.

What resulted was a suppression of the Society. With hindsight, we can say that the Society was suppressed for adhering to Tradition, for remaining Catholic.

In any event, the young Tissier had a decision to make; would he stay in a society of priests that was now the object of scorn and ridicule, or would he leave? Of course, he chose to stay. The rest, as they say, is history.

In 1987 Father Tissier was asked by Archbishop Lefebvre to consider being consecrated a bishop. That fateful exchange went as follows:

He summoned me from Rickenbach to Ecône. In his office, he told me what he wanted. I replied ‘Your Grace, I have made many mistakes in my life, I do not feel capable of being a bishop!’ To that he replied,  ‘I too have made mistakes!’ That answer reassured me very much, and so I said to myself: ‘He has thought this one through. He knows what he must do, much better than I could. He has made his choice. All I have to do is accept it.’ Obviously, I thought of the excommunication that I would incur – not that I believed it to be valid. However, sociologically, it was an infamy to bear. Thus, I assumed it, by the grace of God. As one of my fellow priests had once said, I simply said to myself: ‘The Archbishop has the grace to decide. I have the grace to follow him.’

There is so much wisdom in this paragraph. First, both men believe they are unworthy, given that they have made mistakes in their lives. Second, Tissier easily accepts that his superior and spiritual father possesses greater insight and wisdom than he does. Third, he trusts that the grace of Archbishop Lefebvre’s office will ensure that he is guided by Providence in an uncertain time. It is here that we see Tissier’s prudence, which is textbook.

Many in our day have a muddled understanding of the virtue of prudence and seem to believe that being prudent means doing nothing. Certainly, in some scenarios, doing nothing is the prudent thing to do, but in other cases, prudence requires judgment and action if it is to be any virtue at all.

According to a succinct explanation of Prudent Judgement from the spiritual classic Divine Intimacy, the real test of the virtue of prudence comes when faced with a complex and difficult situation.[1] In that case, we must take the time to examine everything carefully and consult prudent, experienced persons. Furthermore, we must take the advice of those persons and cogitate on what has been explained in prayer and meditation. In addition, when it still is not clear what we should do, prudence enlightened by faith requires us to wait patiently for the workings of Providence to make themselves clear; the gift of counsel will aid us in this. When all the means at our disposal have been considered and we have arrived at a decision, prudence then commands us to put it into effect with courage and diligence, without needless delays and without being discouraged by the difficulties we may face. Also, in order to ensure that our decisions are not made for reasons of personal preference or ego, we must soberly ensure that our decision is not made for personal gain or vanity.

Whatever one may think of Bishop Tissier and Archbishop Lefebvre, I think any reasonable person can agree that when seen in the light of true supernatural prudence, the decision to consecrate bishops in 1988 was made after the most careful and virtuous examination.

We must remember that in 1988, it was Lefebvre and his priests who held fast to Tradition, and virtually no other clerical entity on Earth could say the same.[2] At the end of the day, those involved had no obvious or earthly reason to believe that the hierarchy would preserve Tradition. Given what we know now, it grows harder each day to disagree with them.

Of course, Archbishop Lefebvre receives the majority of the credit for making the decision he made, and rightfully so, but he did not act alone. Bishop Tissier and the other bishops had to agree to follow their general into battle, and they could trust in no other reality but their fidelity to Providence, their spiritual father, and the Faith of All Time. They all knew full well that their actions, although heroic, would be met with scorn and betrayal.

Personally, I cannot imagine the pressure Tissier and his colleagues would have been under, and I cannot fathom the strength it would take to not crumble.

However, Bishop Tissier was not the sort of man to crumble under pressure, and he demonstrated to his fellow priests and the faithful that he was a man who was willing to spend every last drop of his energy to serve the Church and his flock.

He was always a very thin man, and in his older age he could be described as being gaunt, so his strength and character did not come from sheer physical attributes. Those who knew him well speak of him as the sort of man who, although seemingly sickly at times, possessed an engine that seemed to be able to run on empty and even beyond empty. This is evidenced by the fact that throughout his years as a bishop, he travelled the world endlessly, and lived in many different countries, never staying in the same place too long. Again, we ask ourselves why anyone would submit himself to such a fate. We can be sure that he did so for no other reason than the preservation of Tradition and in the service of souls.

On the outside, he could come off as a severe man, and he was, if by severe we mean focused and not easily distracted or swayed, but he was tender in ways that many do not know. One of my listeners shared a story with me, and I will keep the person anonymous for obvious reasons. While travelling and performing confirmations a member of the faithful approached Bishop Tissier and explained that a friend of his was distraught after a suicide in his family, it had really shaken him. So, the good bishop took it upon himself to find this distraught person and write him a personal letter encouraging devotion to the Immaculate Heart, telling him he would privately offer a Mass for the deceased relative, trusting in God’s mercy with the understanding that the workings of the heart in those final moments are unknown to us.

This tender action, I think, demonstrates much of the purpose of Bishop Tissier’s vocation; the service of souls in this vale of tears, with no need or desire for acclaim from anyone.

Two years ago a priest of the SSPX told me that the men who knew him well fully expected that one day he would die saying Mass, thereby breathing his last breath at the altar. Well, that exact thing almost happened. On September 28 after saying the Angelus, he fell and subsequently died after not regaining consciousness.

I do not know if he customarily said the Angelus in French or in Latin, but it seems that the last words he spoke on this Earth were either amen, or ainsi soit-il, which both effectively mean the same thing: “so be it.” We should all pray for such a death, giving our own fiat to God through Our Lady as we enter Eternity.

Many are concerned that the SSPX now only has two bishops, but this is not true. In 1991 Archbishop Lefebvre entered Eternity, and earlier this year Bishop Vitus Huonder, who had come to love Archbishop Lefebvre with great devotion, died after spending his last years living with the Society. Now, another bishop who is a spiritual son of Marcel Lefebvre has left this vale of tears. Of course, we should not canonize any recently deceased person, no matter how holy, because we do not have absolute certainty of the state of their souls. However, I believe we can have a moral certainty that in due time, along with praying for his soul, we might be so bold as to ask Bishop Tissier to pray for us, and I would not be shocked if those prayers were answered.

The SSPX has not lost a bishop, but merely has yet another bishop watching over its priests and faithful from another place, where there “shall be no more, nor mourning, nor crying, nor sorrow shall be any more, for the former things are passed away” (Apoc 21:4). Providence will guide the superiors to make the right decision when the time comes, and when that time does come we can be sure that it will be done with the same prudence and right judgement that Bishop Tissier demonstrated when the Church needed it most.

We would do well to end with a quotation from Bishop Tissier about the role of Our Lady, like every good sermon should end:

Those who are youthful and who remain youthful are those who live according to their principles. Our principle is Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Spirit, Who is the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost speaks to us, and we should be docile firstly to the Tradition of the Church, what the Holy Ghost has revealed to the Apostles, and which is transmitted to us by the Church of all time. Secondly, we are docile to the Holy Ghost in following His divine inspirations; these inspirations of the Holy Ghost come to us by the Blessed Virgin, who is the instrument, the Spouse, the image of the Holy Ghost among us. It is to her Immaculate Heart that we should have recourse to be docile to the inspirations of the Holy Ghost, do the will of the good God, and remain youthful always.[3]

---

[1] I have paraphrased the entry for the sake of brevity. For anyone interested in reading the entry in full, please consult pages 798-799 of Divine Intimacy (Baronius Press edition, 2010).

[2] I understand that in Campos, Brazil there was another example, but it must be admitted that the Campos scenario was fit to serve one region, and not an international solution.

[3] Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, Sermon for Pentecost Sunday, June 6, 2022.