Declaration of Resistance Priests, April 4, 2016, London England

  • Thread starter Deleted member 149
  • Start date

Deleted member 149

Declaration of Resistance Priests
April 4, 2016 (Annunciation)
London, England

It is twenty five years since the death of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. This prelate saved the Catholic Faith, Mass and priesthood, which otherwise would have been lost. The primacy of Doctrine is consistently emphasized by Divine Revelation, the Church’s Magisterium and our founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The Catholic Church remains integrally One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic until the end of time. Her nature cannot change. The Vatican II conciliar church with its new doctrine, new priesthood, new Mass, new sacraments, new catechisms, new Bible, new “miracles’” and new “saints” has not the same nature of the Catholic Church of “Eternal Rome”. Therefore it is another church, separate and not Catholic.

In 2012 it became clear that the Superior General of the SSPX, Bishop Bernard Fellay and his collaborators had abandoned the line of our founder Archbishop Lefebvre and were taking the SSPX in a new direction, one of compromising the Faith by accepting the errors of Vatican II. As a result, since 2012, a Resistance movement, consisting of a handful of priests and faithful, has fought to maintain fidelity to the Faith and the Archbishop, rejecting this compromise. In 2016 we find ourselves faced once again with the same compromise, this time proposed to us from some within the Resistance, primarily those “led” by Bishop Richard Williamson. This compromise is essentially the same as that of Bishop Fellay and the conciliar SSPX, it means the same acceptance of the same errors. The crisis in the Church has not changed and nor has the Faith.

Lamentably, the four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre have all abandoned his position. We insist on the Declaration of 1974 and the integral position of Archbishop Lefebvre which entails the rejection of all the reforms of Vatican II, and their source, the Council itself. Some prominent points of the compromise now being proposed to us are:

1. The conciliar church being held as “distinct” but “not separate” from the Roman Catholic Church; [1]

“...but if one respects reality, one is bound to admit that there is still faith in the New church....” (Eleison Comments #447, “Host and Parasite II”)

“The conciliar and neo-modernist Church is therefore neither a substantially different church from the Catholic Church, nor absolutely identical, it mysteriously has something of the one and of the other: it is a foreign body which occupies the Catholic Church. So we need to distinguish between them without separating them.” (Sel de la Terre, 94, Autumn 2015)

“The fact of going to Rome doesn’t mean that we agree with them. But it’s the Church! And it’s the true Church! In rejecting the bad bits, we mustn’t reject everything. It remains the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.” (Bp. Fellay, Flavigny, 2nd Sepember 2012)

“We refuse, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies, such as were clearly manifested during the Second Vatican Council, and after the Council in all the resulting reforms.” (Abp. Lefebvre, Doctrinal Declaration, 1974)

“The union desired by these Liberal Catholics, a union between the Church and the Revolution and subversion is, for the Church, an adulterous union. Adulterous. And that adulterous union can produce only bastards. And who are those bastards? They are the rites: the rite of Mass is a bastard rite, the sacraments are bastard sacraments – we no longer know if they are sacraments which give grace or which do not give grace.” (Abp. Lefebvre, Lille sermon, 1976)

2. The New Mass as a source of grace and sanctification, and may be partici-
pated in under certain circumstances;

“ the Novus Ordo Mass does not absolutely exclude the old Religion. Thus, by a devout priest, its ambiguities can all be turned in the old direction.” (Eleison Comments #437 ‘Novus Ordo Missae II’)

“As an essential part of the subjective and ambiguous religion, the Novus Ordo Mass can be what you make of it.” (Eleison Comments #447 ‘Host and Parasite II’)

“We declare that we recognize ... the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John-Paul II.” (Bp. Fellay, Doctrinal Declaration, April 15th 2012)

“It is out of the question to encourage people to go to the Mass of the New Rite because, slowly, even without realizing it, they end up Ecumenist!” (Abp. Lefebvre,Econe conference, 11th April 1990)

3. “Eucharistic Miracles” of the New Mass, which can only confirm the conciliar church;
”There are some stubborn facts, apt to perturb the “wishes and inclinations” of Catholics cleaving to Catholic Tradition ... However, these miracles – always assuming they are authentic – have lessons also for the Catholics of Tradition...” (Eleison Comments #436,438)

“The current Pope and bishops no longer hand down Our Lord Jesus Christ, but rather a sentimental, superficial, charismatic religiosity through which, as a general rule, the true grace of the Holy Ghost no longer passes. This new religion is not the Catholic religion; it is sterile, incapable of sanctifying society and the family.” (Abp. Lefebvre, Spiritual Journey, p. ix)

4. “No structure” and “no authority” goes against the very structural foundation of the Church as Christ Himself established it;
“The Catholic normally wants structure... I suggest that the time for structures has already passed. The time for structure is yesterday.” (Bp. Williamson, sermon at the Episcopal Consecration of Dom Tomas Aquinas, 19th March 2016)

“The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable; but Christian society, just as human society, is subject to perpetual evolution.” (Condemned Proposition – St. Pius X, Lamentabile, D.B. 2053)

5. The idea being promoted that for priests to answer the call of the faithful outside of their own chapel or group is somehow unbalanced, excessive or “activism”. This goes profoundly against the Gospel, the mission of the Social Reign of Christ the King, the Good Shepherd, the missionary spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre, and is opposed to the Apostolicity of the Church down the last 2000 years.

“Going therefore, teach ye all nations ... to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” (Mt.28,19ff)

“The priest is not for himself alone...” (St. Pius X, Haerent Animo)

“Caritas Christi urget nos.” For the glory of God and the salvation of souls, we remain a united corps of priests, continuing the work of the SSPX, faithful to Archbishop Lefebvre. All Catholics who wish to remain faithful must continue this combat against Modernism, refusing all novelty no matter from whence it comes.

“We have to build while the others are demolishing.” (Abp. Lefebvre, ‘They Have Uncrowned Him’, ch.34)

“For this reason we hold firmly to all that has been believed and practiced by the Church of all time in her Faith, morals, worship, catechetical instruction, priestly formation and institutions [structures!], and codified in the books which appeared before the modernist influence of the late Council. Meanwhile we continue to wait for the true light of Tradition to dispel the darkness which obscures the skies of Eternal Rome. By doing this, with the grace of God and the help of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and that of St. Joseph and St. Pius X, we are assured of remaining faithful to the Roman Catholic Church and to all the successors of Peter, and of being the fideles dispensatores mysteriorum Domini Nostri Jesu Christi in Spiritu Sancto. Amen.” (Abp. Lefebvre, 1974 Declaration)

Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer, Fr. David Hewko, Fr. Ernesto Cardozo, Fr. Eric Jacqmin


[1] This confusion is what leads Bishop Fellay and the modern SSPX to wish to submit
to modern Rome.