There are too many in the world of Catholicism that somehow try to reconcile Vatican II with Catholic Tradition.  Whether it be that Vatican II can be read in the light of Tradition, that it is in continuity with Tradition (e.g., Pope Benedict XVI’s Hermeneutic of Continuity), or even that there are errors in the Council’s documents but that these errors can be corrected and when done so would consequently make the Council acceptable, none of these positions are in line with what the saintly Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre taught, especially during his latter years, about the Council.  The Archbishop saw the Council as perverted through and through.  And what do you do with such a thing:  condemn it, as a whole, into the dustbin of history!

 

Here are a few quotes of the Archbishop regarding the Council:

 

“It is certain that with the 250 conciliar fathers of the Coetus we tried with all the means put at our disposal to keep the liberal errors from being expressed in the texts of the Council.  this meant that we were able all the same to limit the damage, to change these inexact or tendentious assertions, to add that sentence to rectify a tendentious proposition, an ambiguous expression.

 

 “But I have to admit that we did not succeed in purifying the Council of the liberal and modernist spirit that impregnated most of the schemas.  Their drafters indeed were precisely the experts and the Fathers tainted with this spirit.  Now, what can you do when a document is in all its parts drawn up with a false meaning?  It is practically impossible to expurgate it of that meaning.  It would have to be completely recomposed in order to be given a Catholic spirit.”

(Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, “They Have Uncrowned Him”, Angelus Press, English Edition, 1988, quote is contained in the Chapter called “The Robber Council of Vatican II”, Emphasis Mine)

 

“I do not hesitate to affirm that the Council brought to reality the conversion of the Church to the world.  I leave it to you to reflect who the moving spirit of this spirituality was:  it is enough for you to remember the one whom Our Lord Jesus Christ calls the Prince of this World.”

(Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, “They Have Uncrowned Him”, Angelus Press, English Edition, 1988, quote is contained in the Chapter called “A Pacifist Council”, Emphasis Mine)

 

This fight between the Church and the liberals and modernism is the fight over Vatican II. It is as simple of that. And the consequences are far-reaching.

 

“The more one analyzes the documents of Vatican II, and the more one analyzes their interpretation by the authorities of the Church, the more one realizes that what is at stake is not merely superficial errors, a few mistakes, ecumenism, religious liberty, collegiality, a certain Liberalism, but rather a wholesale perversion of the mind, a whole new philosophy based on modern philosophy, on subjectivism.” 

(Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, “Two Years after the Consecrations”, Address Given to Priests in Econe, Switzerland on September 6, 1990, Emphasis Mine)

 

From these quotes, we can readily ascertain with what vehemence the Archbishop opposed the Second Vatican Council.  He clearly understood the poison contained throughout its documents.  This poison could not simply be separated from the texts that were in accordance with Tradition; rather, the poison was well mixed in the cake thereby making only one solution possible, and that is to reject the Council as a whole.  Now although the Archbishop did not explicitly state that the Council’s documents must be rejected as a whole, it forcibly follows from he did say.

 

Let us now contrast the Archbishop’s words regarding Vatican II with those of Bishop Fellay as proclaimed in the Doctrinal Declaration of April 15, 2012 (emphasis mine).

 

“The entire tradition of Catholic Faith must be the criterion and guide in understanding the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, which, in turn, enlightens – in other words deepens and subsequently makes explicit – certain aspects of the life and doctrine of the Church implicitly present within itself or not yet conceptually formulated.”

 

“The affirmations of the Second Vatican Council and of the later Pontifical Magisterium relating to the relationship between the Church and the non-Catholic Christian confessions, as well as the social duty of religion and the right to religious liberty, whose formulation is with difficulty reconcilable with prior doctrinal affirmations from the Magisterium, must be understood in the light of the whole, uninterrupted Tradition, in a manner coherent with the truths previously taught by the Magisterium of the Church, without accepting any interpretation of these affirmations whatsoever that would expose Catholic doctrine to opposition or rupture with Tradition and with this Magisterium.”

 

Furthermore, here is an interview that Bishop Fellay gave to Catholic News Service, which was published on May 11, 2012 (emphasis mine):

 

Although he stopped short of endorsing Pope Benedict’s interpretation of Vatican II as essentially in continuity with the church’s tradition — a position which many in the society have vocally disputed — Bishop Fellay spoke about the idea in strikingly sympathetic terms.

 

“I would hope so,” he said, when asked if Vatican II itself belongs to Catholic tradition.

 

“The pope says that … the council must be put within the great tradition of the church, must be understood in accordance with it. These are statements we fully agree with, totally, absolutely,” the bishop said. “The problem might be in the application, that is: is what happens really in coherence or in harmony with tradition?”

 

So on the one hand the Archbishop tells us that the Council’s documents would need to be completely rewritten to give them a Catholic spirit, that the devil was the spirit guiding them, and that they represent a total perversion of the mind.  However, on the other hand, Bishop Fellay tells us that the Council documents enlighten and deepen the understanding of certain aspects of the life and doctrine of the Church, that they must be understood in the light of Tradition without rupture, and that they must be given their place within Tradition.  It is evident how radically opposed these two positions are.

 

For those who argue that Bishop Fellay has turned away from what he had stated last year, please be under no illusion.  The conference that he gave in Kansas City on October 12, 2013 actually demonstrates that he does not find anything fundamentally wrong with what he had spoken or written.  He basically only admitted that he should have been more clear in his meaning.  But even to this I protest that what he had spoken and written is clear enough.  And that by his words he had publicly exposed himself as an adversary, objectively speaking, of Catholic Tradition and an unfaithful son of Archbishop Lefebvre!

 

Dear bishops and priests of the Society of St. Pius X, please come to understand where your leader is taking you, that is, away from the position of your founder (which was nothing other than that of Catholic Tradition) and towards the “Hermeneutic of Continuity” of Modernist Rome.  For those who do realize the new direction, will you not stand up and fight for the Faith?  Nothing less than souls are at stake!

 | Posted by | Categories: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre | Tagged: |

Weak and Timid Catholics

24 November 2013

“In our time more than ever before, the chief strength of the wicked lies in the cowardice and weakness of good men… All the strength of Satan’s reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics. Oh! if I might ask the Divine Redeemer, as the prophet Zachary did in spirit: What are those wounds in the midst of Thy hands? The answer would not be doubtful: With these was I wounded in the house of them that loved Me. I was wounded by My friends, who did nothing to defend Me, and who, on every occasion, made themselves the accomplices of My adversaries. And this reproach can be levelled at the weak and timid Catholics of all countries.”

 

Pope St. Pius X, Discourse on the Beatification of Joan of Arc, December 13, 1908

Source:  http://www.therecusant.com/apps/blog/show/36799017-st-pius-x-speaks

 

* * *

 

Over 100 years ago, Pope St Pius X noted that St Joan of Arc suffered as a result of the ‘cowardice and weakness of good men’.

 

We too are living in the times when “good men”, either through cowardice or weakness, speak through both sides of their mouths. For example, one year ago, Bishop Fellay was ready to sign a practical agreement with Rome, while today he thanks God for having protected the SSPX from making such an agreement. Even more, today he is highly critical of the Pope, while at the same time, he continues to persecute priests who speak out against the rebranded position of the SSPX.

 

Persecution is nothing new to the Catholic Church. Roughly nine years after the saintly Pius X made his sad commentary, many souls were about to be persecuted by ‘the cowardice and weakness of good men’. The appearance of Our Lady of Fatima to the three shepherd children was not unanimously met with enthusiasm. While the common people, especially the poor, were naturally drawn to Our Lady, well-placed individuals and priests in particular were not so favourably disposed. One priest, who became a defender of the children and of the Fatima apparition, was Dr Formigao, the Canon of Lisboa and professor at the Seminary of Santarem. “… He had seen the miracle of the sun. He went away believing also in the apparition: and from then on, he was a defender of the children, even in the face of a persistent persecution, all the more difficult to understand when the prime movers in it happened to be not Carbonari or Masons, but fellow Catholics, fellow priests” (page 152).

 

The three children went on to suffer public scorn, and priests like Dr. Formigao who supported the children in the early days of the investigations faced harshness and opposition from other priests, especially from high ranking ones. For example: “… Cardinal Mendes Belo, Patriarch of Lisboa, threatened to excommunicate any priest who spoke in favour of the apparitions. A strong and able man, he was inclined to think in terms of power, public opinion, or prudent expediency. He may have felt that when relations between Church and State were improving, it would be unwise to allow a new and untested devotion to disturb them” (page 173). Excommunication was a high price to pay for being a faithful Catholic!

 

Similarly today, priests who prefer to fight from within the SSPX prudently wish to avoid expulsion (excommunication?) and end up by compromising with the new position of the SSPX. While a year ago priests were not allowed to speak against Rome, it is now fashionable to take a shot at Pope Francis, but only because Bishop Fellay recognizes that he is losing support within the SSPX and thus permits this policy change. For a time…

 

Even some of the more prudent lay people are saying that we should fight from within the SSPX so as not to destroy Archbishop Lefebvre’s work. Do they not realize that even if Bishop Fellay were expelled, even if his henchmen were removed, the past ten+ years have dumbed down the typical SSPX attendee to the point that he will not think, talk, or evaluate? How can he fight from within?

 

Have the prudent Novus Ordo conservatives been able to restore the Church from within?

 

History repeats itself: All the strength of Satan’s reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics (no doubt working from within).

 

Sadly, Bishop Fellay continues to expel outspoken priests, and the SSPX continues to head towards double speak, modernism, and the inevitable deal with Rome.

 

The citations are taken from pages 152 and 173 from W.T. Walsh’s Our Lady of Fatima, 1990 Edition.

 

For those who think that we can and should work from within, please (re)read Thomas Walsh’s St. Theresa of Avila. She did not think that she could work from within!

 

Sister Constance

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

Here is a translation of the recent announcement from Frs. Faure and Rioult regarding an attempt to spark the Resistance in France.  We thank “The Recusant” for the English translation of the French original.

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

The YouTube video below is programmed to start and finish at the relevant portion which is from 2:24:00 to 2:48:40.

 

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

In this short conference, Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer gave an update on the happenings within the Catholic Resistance.  The conference took place on November 10, 2013 in Denver, Colorado.

 

You can directly listen to the audio by left clicking on the “Play” button.  If you prefer to download the audio file to your computer, right click the “Play” button and then left click the “Save audio as” option.

 

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

God’s Sense of Humour?

13 November 2013

450px-Gideon300

 

 

 

Picture taken from:

http://aveclimmaculee.blogspot.fr/2013/11/100-groupes-de-resistance.html

 

God has a sense of humour. Many heroic stories in the Old Testament have a humorous side to them. For example, judging the worthiness of a soldier by the method he uses to drink water is rather funny. Or, having the child David use his slingshot against an experienced warrior  – and getting away with it – is even funnier!
 

For those who are in the mood to hear a funny story, here is one called ‘The Battle of the Pins’. Unfortunately, we cannot find any historical proof to verify it, but it is fondly remembered and given to us by a Traditional Catholic:

 

The Battle of the Pins


 

In England of years gone by, there was a time when Catholics were prevented from going to church for political reasons. The guards stood in front of the church door preventing regular worship from taking place. Because the Catholic men prudently cooperated and duly stayed away from church, the women decided to take matters into their own hands. At a special signal, the women removed a pin from their hats and, pin in hand, walked fast towards the church door, each jabbing a guard in the arm. The guards screamed in pain and, in the general confusion that followed, the women ran inside the church, thereby encouraging their menfolk to throw prudence to the wind and to join them inside the church. Victory was won, and the people regained their right to enter their church!
 
The Battle of the Pins proved that wit and ingenuity were stronger than prudence and fear.  But, more importantly, the Battle of the Pins proved that a mere hatpin – about 8 cm long and intended to hold hats and veils in women’s hair – was an instrument humorously used by God to get the people back on track.

 

* * *

 

I would like to conclude with a story that is not quite so funny but again illustrates that God can use ‘little Davids’ to get His point across.
 
The fact that communism was ousted from Brazil is well known, but what is not so well known is how it was ousted:

 

At one point in the history of Brazil, the capital of Sao Paulo was taken over by communist leaders. The people were against communism but did not know what to do. The solution came from the Catholic women, who, with their children, took to the streets, praying the Rosary loudly for three days. Many people joined the women with the result that the streets of Sao Paulo looked like waves of people praying the Rosary. The result was that the communists packed up and left the country.
 
So once again, God uses methods that seem unusual or even funny in order to encourage us and to accomplish what seems humanly impossible.
 

* * *

 
Like Gideon’s soldiers, let us do our part, and God will provide the victory!

 

Sister Constance

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

SSPX-Marian Corps Toronto

13 November 2013

As of today, we have changed the name of our website (the address remains the same) to “SSPX-Marian Corps Toronto”.  This change has been done to reflect a couple of reasons:

 

1) The work of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Catholic Tradition is no longer carried forward by the Society of St. Pius X under Bishop Bernard Fellay.  It is now being carried by former priests of the Society of St. Pius X who have been either expelled or have left on their own.  A few of these priests have officially taken on the name “SSPX-Marian Corps“, including Frs. Joseph Pfeiffer, David Hewko, and Francois Chazal.  Since these priests carry forward the work of Archbishop Lefebvre and since Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer is the missionary pastor of Our Lady of Good Success Chapel in Toronto, we deemed it only appropriate to make the website name change.

2) We have restricted the geographical boundary name to Toronto (which includes the Greater Toronto Area) because when this website was first established there were no other formally established Resistance groups within Canada.  However, we now have Fr. Patrick Girouard and his group in British Columbia and another separate group in Quebec.

 

Let us face it.  Barring a miracle, there is no hope left for the Society of St. Pius X under Bishop Fellay.  It is toast in the fight for Catholic Tradition.  We have tried to fight against the changes, but by now most people, priests and laity, have made their decision on whose side they are on.  It is too bad that most SSPX priests have let us down and continue to give a false obedience to Bishop Fellay, but we must move on.  God will be their judge.  As far as we are concerned, the Society of St. Pius X under Bishop Fellay are in the same class as other pseudo-Traditional groups, such as the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and the Institute of Christ the King.  Our battle must now go beyond just the Society of St. Pius X under Bishop Fellay and include anybody or anything anti-Catholic.

 

For the Reign of the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts!

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

Saints In Action

11 November 2013

The book Saints In Action by William Thomas Walsh is of particular interest to anyone who is seeking the truth. The following quotes, taken from Walsh’s study on St Athanasius, are relevant to our situation today.

 

As the council [of Nicea] opened its 318 members fell roughly into three groups. More than two hundred of the bishops were busy men who wanted to think with the Church but had very little awareness of what the doctrine of Arius signified or how dangerous it might be, and might be swayed to one side or the other. The Arians numbered not more than a score; but their leaders were shrewd and unscrupulous, seeking power rather than money and advantage of entering the conclave with a carefully prepared program. The opposition was another small minority of not over thirty, under the leadership of Bishop Alexander, who was so bowed down with years and infirmities that nothing very bold or vigorous was expected from him (page 178).

 

The same three types of groups were clearly present at Vatican II and again are visible in the SSPX. History merely repeats itself.

 

[Emperor Constantine] made a farewell address in which he begged them [the bishops] all to forgive and forget their differences, and to labor by good example to bring sincere converts into the Church. “Some join for what they can get,” he said, “some for preferment, some to obtain charitable aid, some for the sake of friendship. The true lovers of sound argument are few in number: truly rare is the friend of truth. Yet he went on to say that Christians should be accommodating and compromising rather than unyielding and fanatical. It is doubtful whether Constantine ever understood that Christianity tends to wither away under compromise and to flourish when it is most unyielding (pages 183-184).

 

It seems that this is not the time to compromise or to breathe a sigh of relief that the SSPX has not signed an agreement with Rome, but rather to continue studying and adhering to the True Faith. Doctrine may seem unaccommodating and uncompromising and, at times, even unyielding and fanatical, but we can never compromise. St. Athanasius knew that, as did William Thomas Walsh. Thank God for these heroic men!

 

Please note that William Thomas Walsh is the author of many splendid books on Catholic History. Check www.amazon.com and www.abebooks.com

 

The paragraphs referenced are from W. T. Walsh’s Saints In Action, 1961 Edition.

 

Sister Constance

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |