Bishop Fellay Unrepentant

Bishop Fellay, in an interview published June 7, 2013, demonstrates his lack of repentance for the damage he has done to the Society of the St. Pius X.  Instead, he continues to blame others who only seek the return of the Society back to the position of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.


“Those who divide the Society with their dialectic, they should reflect on why they do what they do. With this, I mean Bishop Williamson and the priests who follow him.”


No, Your Excellency, it is you who have divided the Society by wanting a canonical agreement prior to the conversion of Rome.  It is you that submitted to unconverted Rome a doctrinal declaration that is abominable!


The war goes on for the life of Catholic Tradition with or without you.  I pray for your soul.

Bishop Fellay Endorsed “Fraud, Schism, and Heresy” according to Fr. Paul Kramer

At the conference in London, England held on June 1 and 2, 2013 and sponsored by The Recusant Newsletter, Fr. Paul Kramer gave a conference on the Sunday.  In this conference, he spoke about the legitimacy of the promulgation of the New Rite of Mass under Pope Paul VI.  Without naming Bishop Fellay, Fr. Paul Kramer stated that to say that the New Rite of Mass was “legitimately promulgated” is an act, objectively speaking, of “fraud, schism, and heresy”.  The reference was directly made to the Doctrinal Declaration (or Preamble as some people call it) of Bishop Fellay dated April 15, 2012 and submitted to Rome.  Here is a link to the relevant extract of that conference:


Extract of Conference of Fr. Paul Kramer


To get the full context of the conference, you may listen to it at the link below:


Full Conference of Fr. Paul Kramer

Every Catholic Is a Soldier

“The Catholic life is essentially an army in which we all enlisted and swore to defend the treasure of the Faith on the day of our Baptism. All Catholics are soldiers and we must fight against our enemies, who are principally the Devil and our flesh.


“But often our enemies are also the world and our governors, who should lead us to happiness in society. If these men, far from leading us on the path of good, drag us onto the road of iniquity, we are obliged to make resistance against them. In this sense we should understand these words of Jesus Christ: ‘I did not come to bring peace, but the sword;’ and also. ‘Do not fear those who kill the body, but rather fear him who can destroy both body and soul in the fire of Hell.’ For this reason the Apostles answered the Princes who forbade them to preach: ‘We must obey God rather than men.’


“Now then, this resistance can be either active or passive. The martyr who lets himself be cut to pieces rather than deny his Faith resists passively. The soldier who defends the liberty to adore his God on the battlefield actively resists his persecutors.


“Regarding individuals, there are cases where passive resistance is preferable – since the martyr is more perfect. This is the case of priests who walk unarmed on a bloody battlefield assisting the dying, and who, falling at the hands of the enemy, bear the torment without counter-attacking.


“This is also the case for innocent citizens who, for just reasons, do not enter the armed fight and who, nonetheless, are persecuted by the impious populace because of their Faith.


“But martyrdom is not the normal law of war. The martyrs are few; It would be an inanity or, in other words, it would be tempting God to pretend that an entire people should achieve martyrdom.


“The normal law of war has to be active engagement, where the assaulted party counter-attacks the aggressor in the same way the aggression was made.


“When, therefore, a society is aggressed by the one governing it, a defense must soon be articulated. If it is the case of intellectual or moral aggressions, the weapons to be employed must be of the same genre. But when the aggression is of a material order, legal and peaceful means should be employed first. If they do not produce any result, then it is necessary to appeal to other material means.


“It is necessary, we believe, to make another distinction. If the tyrant, even when he oppresses the people and deprives them of some of their liberties, still allows them the essential liberties, such as to adore God, and does not make social life impossible, then one must bear it with patience – above all if the damages of a armed struggle are greater.


“But, if the tyrant attacks essential liberties, if he betrays the country, if he slays, violates and systematically attacks the life and honor of families and all individuals, then an armed defense is a duty of society, a duty which imposes itself on all members of the community.


“To bear a tyrant in these conditions would be to commit the crime of destroying Religion and the Motherland. This obligation exists not only in the case where it is humanly possible to defeat the tyrant, but also in the case where that it is impossible. The reason for this is because the loss of the Faith and national independence is the ruin of society itself. These are evils greater than the death of a large number of citizens. This is precisely what is happening in the case of Mexico.”

(Msgr. José de Jesús Manríquez y Zárate, Bishop of Huejutla, During the Cristeros Civil War)


Taken from:

The Neo-SSPX Is a Result of Being “Branded”

In an explosive revelation, Fr. Patrick Girouard attested in his June 2, 2013 sermon that Fr. Jurgen Wegner, Canadian District Superior of the Society of St. Pius X, revealed to him during a conversation they had in October 2012 while Fr. Wegner was in British Columbia, that Bishop Fellay, with the assistance of Fr. Wegner, hired a company to change the image of the SSPX in order to attract more faithful.  The conclusion of this company was that the SSPX had to tone down its fight against the Vatican II church.  It had to focus more on the positive side of things and stop arguing so much.  Is this not what we have been exactly seeing in the SSPX recently!  The “branding” of the new image of the SSPX, then, has been masterminded by Menzingen!  But at what cost?  Unfortunately, it has been at the cost of the reduction, both in frequency and intensity, in condemning doctrinal errors and heterodox practices coming from Modernist Rome and the Modernist Bishops.  Where, for example, did Bishop Fellay publicly condemn the Assisi III meeting hosted by Pope Benedict XVI?  Unfortunately, this new image of the SSPX has made it become not much better than the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter or the Institute of Christ the King.


Fr. Giroud’s sermon can be seen, heard, and read at this link:


Evidence to support Fr. Giroud’s claim can be found in the January/February 2012 issue of The Angelus.  Fr. Wegner writes in the “Last Word” column of this issue that:


“A renowned European branding firm developed a corporate style for which the Society which is supposed to be used not only for The Angelus but for all kinds of publications, for correspondence as well as for the also renewed website.  I’m very happy being closely involved in this work and honored writing these lines.” 


On May 13, 2012 Fr. Wegner gave a sermon at the Church of the Transfiguration in Toronto where he spoke about this company and what an executive of this company said to him.  You can listen to the recording at the link below.  Start at the 22 minute mark.


The very next day, I personally wrote to Fr. Wegner, via e-mail, the following:


“Dear Fr. Wegner,


I thank you for the sermon yesterday.  You’ve raised some good points.  One thing that I have been thinking about, however, is your statement that someone told you that the SSPX is fighting against an already ruined Church and that it is time to re-build.  I think the SSPX has been re-building since the first day of its foundation and fighting at the same time.  Nevertheless, one of the problems I find with your statement is that Pope Benedict XVI continues to praise the cause of the ruin, that is, Vatican II.  I could understand if the pope was calling out for help to implement truly Catholic doctrine and morality, but his refusal to repent of the doctrinal and moral crimes that he has committed throughout his clerical career and his refusal to condemn the errors of Vatican deters me from accepting your statement as valid.  The Church is in ruins indeed, but the cause of those ruins continues to be praised by this pope.  He still sees Vatican II as the future of the Church!  And we are to trust him?


Father, please understand that I am a baby when it comes to this fight for Tradition.  I have only been with the SSPX for seven years.  But when three Bishops of the Holy Roman Catholic Church consecrated by the saintly Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre write a letter to the Superior General of the SSPX that they are against a canonical deal, one has to really stop and think about Bishop Fellay’s wisdom in this matter.  Bishop Fellay has still not even publicly explained why he has changed course from requiring a doctrinal agreement prior to a canonical one to now being willing to accept a canonical deal prior to a doctrinal resolution.


Trust me when I say that whatever decision Bishop Fellay makes, I pray and hope that everything will work out for the greater glory and honour of God and for the good of the Church, but I have a difficult time believing that making a canonical deal at this point in time is really the solution.


God bless.”

The Recusant London Conference – June 1 & 2, 2013

The Catholic Resistance in Canada has created a webpage where you can download mp3 audio files of the London Conference hosted by the Recusant on June 1 & 2, 2013.  Here is the link:


You can either left click on an audio file to listen to it immediately or right click and then left click “Save target as” option to download the audio file to your computer.


Information about this conference can be found at this link: