Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

The Last EC words of H. E. Bp. Williamson, (Posthumous) WHY “RESISTANCE”?

The Last EC words of H. E. Bp. Williamson, (Posthumous) WHY “RESISTANCE”? on April 12, 2025

Why fear the SSPX? Because it leads  

Towards accepting faithless Rome’s misdeeds.  

The following testimony of a former SSPX priest goes back to 2013.  It has been slightly shortened and adapted. Rome insists that the SSPX accept the New Mass and Vatican II.  For the last 12 years the SSPX has given way on neither:—  

“If, as a group of 25 adults and 10 children, representing about a third of a normal SSPX parish, we have decided to go independent, it was not because of emotions. We are not angry, bitter, or resentful towards the SSPX. Nor did we leave for the love of change or excitement. Basically we were forced out of the SSPX by its lack of truth. We did not want to contribute to the destruction of the Traditional movement. For we have studied seriously the documents that shed light on the recent crisis of the SSPX, and the good work of the “Resistance” enabled us to understand what happened. We gently hope to encourage more priests and faithful to do likewise.  

“What we came to realize was that, for all practical purposes, the Society of St. Pius X had become in effect the tenth religious Congregation to have rallied to the Conciliar Church. Even if no deal has yet been signed, the principle of such a deal was adopted by the July 2012 General Chapter. For indeed, however few or many conditions the SSPX leaders might insist on for such an eventual deal, they decided that the Society could henceforth sign a pact with those who are relentlessly changing the Catholic Faith. In the last negotiations between Archbishop Lefebvre and Cardinal Ratzinger leading up to the Consecrations of June, 1988, the Cardinal demonstrated that Rome had no intention of doing anything serious for Catholic Tradition. From then on, the Archbishop never talked again with Roman officials. Is not the New Mass an abomination before God, helping innumerable souls to lose the Catholic Faith? How can any Catholic worthy of the name even think of making a deal with the unrepentant defenders of such a falsification of Our Lord’s one true and indispensable Sacrifice?  

“I remember Archbishop Lefebvre quoting prophet Malachy when talking against the New Mass:  “To you O priests, that despise My name, and have said: Wherein have we despised Thy name? I reply,You offer polluted bread upon My altar, and if you say: Wherein have we polluted Thee? I say: Your table of the Lord is contemptible. If you offer blind imperfect offerings for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if you offer the lame and the sick, is it not evil?  Saith the Lord of hosts.” (I: 6–8).  

“The mission of the SSPX has never been to integrate the structure of the Conciliar Church in order to “transform” it from the inside. Such an illusion was condemned by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988 after the Consecrations. The Society’s mission is to train true Catholic priests. These priests will in turn preach the Truth and fight vigorously against error, without compromise or “talks,” “dialogue,” or “negotiations.” This little legion will then be like a beacon attracting the souls of good will. The present management of the Society is stamping out dissent and expelling critics. The only way for us to receive the Truth and to speak it out, loud and clear, is to separate ourselves from this new SSPX. Let us be ready to make many sacrifices, let us pray a lot for the solution of the crisis and for our perseverance in the good fight. 

“You may object: when will be the time to join Rome? How will we know if we have a good Pope? The answer is quite simple: When the Pope publicly condemns the New Mass and forbids its celebration under pain of excommunication; when he publicly condemns and rejects the whole of Vatican II and its aftermath. In other words, when he takes action to clean up the mess. And if we ask when we can fully trust the SSPX again, the answer is the same: when all SSPX leaders and priests of the Society who have promoted the new line will be demoted; when the texts of the 2012 Chapter will be properly condemned; when the faithful priests will be vindicated by the new management; when a book on the history of this crisis will be published and read yearly in our communities; when a new General Chapter will abjure any contact with Conciliar authorities, until Rome has cleaned up its mess. And if it seems as though this could never happen, I answer simply: So what? What is the problem? Let us merely do our duty, give glory to God, and let Him deal with our former colleagues who are in danger of compromising. We pray and sacrifice for their conversion, sure enough. But compromise, and put ourselves in harm’s way? Never!  Nevertheless, let us remain united with them in prayer.  

Kyrie eleison.

SSPX BETRAYAL

SSPX BETRAYAL on January 18, 2025

Let a maid not meet with wolves. They may be charming,

But such charm is, for a maid, much too disarming!

How can an innocent maiden raw life know?

That’s why the Archbishop himself to Rome would go. 

At https://crowdbunker.com/v/A7bwTo5Ysp on the Internet can be found an interesting video presentation in French entitled “Betrayal of the SSPX, told by priests.” The background picture shows Pope Bergoglio and Fr. David Pagliarani, Superior General of the SSPX (Society of St Pius X) putting their heads together, as though they are the best of friends. The picture may well be a fabrication rather than real, but it is a good fabrication, because it sums up the huge unreality that both of them are pursuing, namely that 2+2=4, and 2+2= 4 or 5 (or 6 or 6 million), can be reconciled in 2+2 = four and a half. But that is exactly the same unreal reconciliation that Pope Benedict and Bishop Fellay were dreaming of in 2009. It is the unreal dream of liberals that things are not necessarily what they objectively are, but anything that I may subjectively like them to be. For instance, if I do not like Ten Commandments, then I make them Ten Options! 

And if for another ten years nothing interrupts the present course of Church affairs, then in in 2035 another Church leader and another SSPX Superior General will be caricatured in the same way because the liberal Church leader will still be posing as a friend of Catholic Tradition, while the dream-Traditional SSPX leader will still be seeking for official Church approval from the real enemies of the Faith. A good cartoonist could enhance the fabrication by portraying Fr Pagliarani as Little Red Riding Hood and the apparent Pope as the Big Bad Wolf: “What lovely teeth you have,” she fawns. “All the better to eat you up with, sweetie pie!” 

However,  “Judge not, that ye be not judged,” says Our Lord in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. VII, 1–5). Certainly not all priests in the SSPX are traitors well aware that they want to get rid of the last trace of Archbishop Lefebvre. Certainly seminarians in the seminaries which he built are still receiving something inherited from him. But the problem is among their Superiors, liberals firmly entrenched at the controls of the SSPX at Headquarters in Menzingen, Switzerland. They may themselves firmly believe that Catholic doctrine excludes contradiction, as certainly as 2+2=4 excludes contradiction in arithmetic. But how then can they be so intent upon obtaining official Church approval for Catholic Tradition from today’s apostates in Rome? These have modernism firmly in their heads, which means the profound undermining of ancient and obvious truth. Between modern ears there are no longer enough grey cells capable of grasping old truth. 

This is so much so that when a would-be friend of the SSPX proposes it should follow the 1988 example of Archbishop Lefebvre by taking for itself, even without Rome’s approval, the bishops it so needs for its worldwide apostolate, a sadder and wiser friend replies, “That is no longer possible. SSPX HQ has so imposed on Newsociety seminaries a doctrine of obedience to the Roman authorities and of obedience to the Newsociety authorities, that the young priests coming out of these seminaries for the last many years would be in total confusion. Like in the Church of the 1950’s, obedience has taken precedence of Truth. Consequence – “You must do what I say, merely because I say it.” The folly existed in Latin –  “Sic volo, sic jubeo. Stat pro ratione voluntas” (Thus I wish, thus I command, my will takes the place of reason.) 

In the the 1950’s, Catholics had a very real problem: how to bridge the ever widening gap between the real demands of the Faith and the real godlessness of the modern world, rising all the time. Fiftiesism, “Pay, pray and obey,” or, keeping up the appearances of the Faith while emptying out its substance, was not the needed solution. Quite naturally, appearances without the substance meant the collapse of both appearances and substance, and that was the Church of the 1960’s. Vatican II naturally followed on Fiftiesism. Vatican IIB risks gravely following tomorrow on what Menzingen is imposing on its seminarians today. 

Therefore today’s Newsociety, but not all its priests, is leading not away from, but back to, Vatican II of the terrible 1960’s. “Cavete, consules.” Watch out, chiefs. At the very least, cease to inspire photographic cartoonists lampooning you as hobnobbing with your deadly enemy!

Kyrie eleison

CHARITY 2025

CHARITY 2025 on January 11, 2025

If Catholics practised charity, every foe 

Would be, without a drop of blood, struck low.

About one month ago a priest of the Catholic “Resistance” in France, Fr. Matthew Salenave, another refugee from the SSPX, penned a wise portrait of the state in which the Catholic Church finds itself today. Previously he had written in public somewhat critically of the state of the Newsociety of St Pius X as having slidden from what it used to be when it was founded and led by Archbishop Lefebvre. With the text that follows he wrote that he wished to add a few “more positive and encouraging considerations.” He continued –  

“. . . . If God allows for a priestly operation to slide, that does not mean He wishes to abandon His Church or the souls redeemed by His Precious Blood. That is why alongside the sad deterioration of the Society of St Pius X He has been raising up for at least the last 10 years a number of strongholds, a variety of little fortresses of the Faith. They do not necessarily all share the same point of view or show the same firmness in their positions, but for sure and certain they none of them want to go on following the Newsociety in its desire to go back under Roman authority.

Thus we have the Company of Mary with Fr Chazal, the Apostles of Jesus and Mary with Bishop Faure, the Priory of Villeneuve with Fr Pivert, the Dominicans of Avrille, the Benedictines of Bellaigue and various priestly confraternities under the authority of the “Resistance” bishops and different priories . . . all gathered together under the moral and spiritual authority of the seven bishops of the “Resistance.” Obviously, most important of all in this Catholic effort to resist is the Catholic Faith, with bishops in the front line of defence, for that is how the Church continues in its Faith, hierarchy, and sacraments. 

 Each stronghold will have its own characteristics and even weaknesses. One or the other stronghold may even fall to the enemy, as Fr Calmel said about them, but the fall of one or the other will not bring them all down together, as it would do if they were all united in one single organisation of Catholic Tradition. 

 Fr Calmel used to underline also the need for charity to bind these strongholds together. There may well be a certain autonomy to be respected in the case of each stronghold, but there is no less need for them to look after one another, and for them to avoid those ecclesiastical and religious jealousies which have always been a bane of Church life. This situation will not last for ever, but only until the Church regains a perfectly Catholic Pope. Let us so pray and act that God can give us one such as soon as possible!” 

 So why are these considerations of Fr Salenave worthy of recommendation?   In a few bullet-points –  

 * The prime perspective is of God (para 1), and of what He is doing to look after His Church. It is God who allowed the SSPX to flirt once more with the apostates in Rome, partly because their pride deserved it, partly because He needed a single worldwide congregation to re-establish the rights of Tradition, but once that was achieved, He no longer needed a single Congregation that might even seem to replace the official Church. 

 * Thus we have a diversity of Traditional groups (para 2), all centred on the Faith, not on their own glory nor even their survival, but relying on their own bishops for a minimal resemblance of Catholic authority. 

 * This diversity of these strongholds and the unofficial status of their bishops (para 3) are certainly not a normal way for the Catholic Church to function, but in today’s circumstances, of God cleansing His Church, the diversity prevents a joint fall (para 2), and the unofficiality leaves room for God to restore His Church officially and properly, in His own good time, by the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of His Mother. 

 * Fr Salenave began with the Faith and he finishes with Charity (para 4). If strongholds claim to be serving the Church but have no charity, especially towards one another, they are, as St Paul strongly says ( I Cor. XIII, 1) “as a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.” Let strongholds realise what example of charity they are giving! 

Kyrie eleison

SOME ANSWERS

SOME ANSWERS on November 16, 2024

The chaos of today is serving to purge

Mankind. Bad men will undergo the scourge.

60 years ago this writer was given by God a real sense of civilisation disintegrating. From there it was merely a matter of time (and grace) before the pursuit of Truth led him to the Catholic Church. The same pursuit of Truth led him at the end of 1972 to Archbishop Lefebvre and to his Seminary in Econe, Switzerland. At the same time he entered the Society of St Pius X which had been founded as a framework of the Church to surround and support the priests that the Archbishop would soon be ordaining. He foresaw difficulties with the official Church in a few years’ time. He was right.

If he was right, how could he envisage defying the official Church? Because the Faith is greater than obedience. Alas, even the successors of Archbishop Lefebvre at the head of the Society that he founded, failed, like the churchmen of Vatican II, to have his grasp of the necessity to “disobey” when the Faith is at stake. Better to obey God than men, says St Peter (Acts IV, 19). The drama of our poor age is that the mass of men have lost their grip on objective truth. As man is taken to be above God, so the subject is supposedly above the object (Emmanuel Kant). This error “liberates” from any objective truth or faith.

What about the Priestly Union of Marcel Lefebvre? It became defunct and was dissolved soon after its founding in 2013, because of serious dissension among its first members. Since then the so-called “Resistance” has not been structured in any way. It is merely a loose association of priests who all over the world see the crisis of the Church in the same way, namely that neither the Newchurch of Vatican II, nor the “sedevacantists” against Vatican II (at least the dogmatic ones), nor the Newsociety following a different orientation from that of its Founder, Archbishop Lefebvre, have the right answer to the Church’s crisis. However, only the true Church’s proper Authority can impose what is God’s own answer, so the loose association of resistant priests waits for Almighty God to restore His stricken Papacy. Meanwhile, “The Shepherd is struck and the sheep are scattered.” Because this “Resistance” is not structured or even organised, it is difficult to tell just how many priests might claim that they belong to it.

As for the Newchurch, “renewed” by Vatican II in the 1960’s, it is surely much further down the path of total destruction than it was in the 1970’s or 80’s. The downhill slide is inexorable, until the churchmen abandon these disastrous principles of the French Revolution and of the modern world which were designed from the beginning by Judeo-masonry to do away with God, with Jesus Christ and with His Catholic Church. It looks very much as though only a severe Chastisement from God will bring the Conciliar churchmen to their Catholic senses. Alas, numbers of churchmen still refuse to understand that the Faith is greater than obedience, because Catholic obedience is only for the Faith. Authority exists in the Church only to protect the Truth from human beings, who all suffer from original sin. “Obedience is not the servant of obedience” – Spanish proverb. Obedience is the servant of Truth, and not its master.

True Catholic obedience presupposes a truly Catholic Pope at the top of the pyramid of the Church’s hierarchy. For such a Pope, God wants us to wait and to pray. We will have him, in God’s good time. If Catholics do see at last the need to return to Tradition, it is understandable if they wish to go further back than the liturgical reform of 1962, but it is not essential. Patience. The liturgy will be properly restored.

Catholics who in the 2020’s realise that they risk losing the Faith if they obey their Conciliar clergy need to do two things. Firstly, pray every day all 15 Mysteries of the Holy Rosary, and not just five. Secondly, to make sure of saving their souls for eternity, they need to find out all about the Five First Saturdays of Our Lady of Fatima, and do them. She will then look after them and protect them from the world, the flesh and the Devil, as only She can. And they will help towards the Consecration of Russia, essential for the restoration of the Catholic Church.

Kyrie eleison.

VIGILANT BISHOP

VIGILANT BISHOP on November 9, 2024

A bishop guards his flock by truth they learn.

That doctrine into fibs the modernists turn.

Just over one month ago one of the four bishops consecrated in 1988 by Archbishop Lefebvre without the Pope’s permission, died. It was from a fracture of the skull from falling down on a stone staircase in the Seminary of Econe, Switzerland, where he had been living for the past several years. His Excellency Bishop Tissier de Mallerais was 79 years old, and had in a long life rendered considerable service to the Archbishop’s Society of St Pius X. To commemorate his leaving this “vale of tears” let these “Comments” recall here at least three of those occasions, with the gratitude of all of us to him, and with our prayers for the repose of his soul.

Firstly, at the end of the 1960’s when the Archbishop had launched the first year of a projected Seminary, at the end of that year so many of the first seminarians left him that he was on the point of giving up his project as though it had no future. It was two of those young seminarians who persuaded him not to give up, but to try again for the next school-year. One was Paul Aulagnier, virtual founder of the Society’s anchor District in France. The other was Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, future bishop of the Society. Where would the Catholic Church – and the world – be today, had the two of them not persuaded the Archbishop to persevere in what would become the spearhead of upholding Catholic Tradition in a Church and world going mad?

Secondly, in the 1980’s the Archbishop was locked in a deadly struggle to the death with the Freemasonic enemies of the Church, who were firmly holding onto the levers of power in the Church handed over to them by Vatican II as a just punishment from God for mankind’s worldwide apostasy. The main problem was doctrinal – the joint errors of religious liberty and false ecumenism, both of them profoundly undermining all Catholic dogma. It was Fr. Tissier on whom the Archbishop largely relied to spell out the true doctrine of the Church in order to make clear why Catholic Tradition, being betrayed by the modernists, had to be defended at all costs. The inspiration came from the Archbishop, but Fr Tissier was his executive instrument.

And thirdly, in 2006, Bishop Tissier gave a serious interview to Stephen Heiner, then writing for The Remnant, American Catholic magazine which surely has the full text available in its archives. When Heiner thought that he had finished the interview, the Bishop objected – no, Heiner had left out the essential – once again doctrine, the horrific doctrinal errors of Pope Benedict XVI. It is clear from the last part of the interview that the Bishop had taken the trouble to read himself what Fr Ratzinger actually wrote earlier in his career as a “theologian.” How many of us have actually taken that trouble? In justice the Bishop tells Heiner that he does not know if Pope Ratzinger has renounced his sentimental foolishness, but Tissier does also say that by 2006 Ratzinger had not yet retracted his errors. Here is a quote from pages 232 to 233, translated from the German of Ratzinger’s book, Introduction to Christianity, appearing in 1968 –

“. . . some texts of devotion seem to suggest that the Christian faith in the Cross understands God as a God whose inexorable justice required a human sacrifice, the sacrifice of his own Son. And we flee with horror from a justice, the dark anger of which removes any credibility from the message of love.”

In other words the Cross was too horrible to be true, because God the Father cannot have required such a cruel sacrifice from His beloved Son, because such cruelty contradicts the new Conciliar religion of “luv.” Here is modernism, pure and simple. Contrast how St Ignatius devotes the whole First Week of the Catholic Exercises to making retreatants grasp just how serious their sins have been. Fr. Ratzinger was turning the Faith to mush. Bishop Tissier was guarding the Faith. See the whole Tissier-Heiner interview.

Thank you, Your Excellency. May you be resting in peace.

Kyrie eleison.

VATICAN II SHORT – SIGHTED

VATICAN II SHORT – SIGHTED on October 19, 2024

Poor modern man, so drastically short-sighted,

His whole life being, by that short sight, blighted!

If we want to save our souls for eternity, as God wants all of us to do (I Tim. II,4), then the world now surrounding us is a dangerous environment for that purpose because, broadly speaking, for seven centuries mankind has been slowly but surely demoting God in order to take His place. It is a foolish attempt, doomed to fail, but in the meantime it has brought mankind to the brink of nuclear suicide. Now, on that road to ruin, from the Incarnation onwards, the greatest obstacle to the folly of man was God’s own Church instituted by God’s own Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, to be the continuation of His Incarnation amongst men, as the Light of the World to dispel men’s confusion, and the Salt of the Earth to prevent men’s corruption. Alas, Vatican II in the 1960’s was the summit of men’s attempts to serve the Devil by crippling that Church, so as to send all men’s souls to Hell instead of Heaven. From here came the confusion and corruption all around us.

But Vatican II had to be subtle, because by the 20th century Mother Church had already analysed and refuted the great errors leading up to Vatican II, especially Protestantism (1517) and its progeny, Liberalism (1717) and Communism (1917). Among the host of errors accompanying these three, surely the most dangerous was Modernism (1907), because it was led by priests from inside the Church, wishing to update God’s Church by adapting it to godless modern man. Therefore subtlety was needed to deceive Catholics alerted to Protestantism in all its forms (and for the same reason, even more subtlety will be needed by the Antichrist to fool a mankind alerted by the divine Chastisement occurring between now and then).

When Archbishop Lefebvre died in 1991, one of his hopes was that the Society of priests which he had founded in 1970 would work on the subtle errors of Vatican II to analyse and denounce them. This is precious work for the salvation of souls, and one book is outstanding in this respect, Prometheus, the Religion of Man, by Fr Alvaro Calderon, translated into French and published last May by the Society’s printing-house in France, accessible at www.clovis-diffusion.com The book is not an easy read, but it is highly to be recommended for its masterly thomistic breakdown of Vatican II. Here for instance is, in very brief form, the first major error of Vatican II, denounced by Fr Calderon:

Man must be the centre of religion, because he is, amongst all other material creatures, the only creature that is also spiritual. Therefore he is superior to all of them, he is the main purpose of all of them, and he is the main purpose of all material creation, being the only creature created for himself, all other material creatures having been created only for him. Therefore he must be at the centre of any true religion of that creation.

But all of this argument leaves out the Creator. If we start out from God and not from man, then we know that the one and only ultimate cause of the creation of man must be the essence of God Himself, because the one and only object possible of God’s willing anything at all is His own goodness, because that infinite goodness alone can fulfil His infinite willing. Any creature and everything that He chooses freely to create, He can only will in and through His willing of His own uncreated Self.

Therefore it can only be Himself, and not man, who is the ultimate purpose of creation, and He alone who can be at the centre of any true religion of that creation. All of the arguments in the documents of Vatican II which attempt to put man instead of God at the centre of creation around us, fail, for ignorance, witting or unwitting, wilful or unwilful, of Catholic Tradition’s supreme treasures of philosophy and theology. Thus one of the last and worst of all the Vatican II documents, Gaudium et Spes, is, says Fr Calderon, shot through with the very inadequate modern philosophy of Personalism, by which the human person is at the centre of everything. No, he is not. It is God who is at the centre of everything.

Kyrie eleison