Traditionalist SSPX calls Vatican offer ‘clearly unacceptable’

Print More

Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content by logging-in here.

VATICAN CITY (RNS) The Catholic traditionalist group SSPX said the Vatican's latest reconciliation offer is "clearly unacceptable,'' a move that comes as Pope Benedict XVI appointed a high-profile American prelate to oversee relations with traditionalists. By Alessandro Speciale.

  • Laurence. Ringo

    What exactly is the urgency behind this wanting to be reconciled to this obviously renegade group? It’s clear SSPX has little real interest in this union;they’re playing games and tweaking and parsing every jot and tittle! Why is Rome wringing her hands over these people;they can’t even agree among themselves,it seems! It seems Benedict is as weak and vacillitating as its been claimed;no wonder Catholicism is in such disarray!

  • Stephen Spencer

    Ringo, I would imagine that the Pope sees the astounding injustice in banning an organization which fully accepts all Councils and all Church teachings up until 1960, while at the same time keeping in full communion those who REJECT all Councils and all Church teachings BEFORE 1960: sometimes including the Divinity of Christ, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, the reality of sin, etc. Compared to such issues “ecumenicalism”–whatever that even means–is small potatoes.

  • Ronald Sevenster

    The embarrassing point for the Vatican is that traditionalists are among the most faithful to the doctrinal and moral teachings of the Church. They believe in the dogmas of Catholicism and accept all its moral teachings, including those on sexual morality. The Church would be strengthened by having these zealous people within its fold. Actually modern Catholics who don’t care much for the teachings of Rome and accept contraception and other deviant sexual practices are infinitely farer away from the Church than the SSPX people.

    Actually the historical continuity between the pre-Vatican II Church and the SSPX is stronger than that between the pre-Vatican II Church and the offical Roman Catholic Church, in theological doctrine as well as in liturgical and pastoral practice. Naturally, thus, the Roman Church has a longing to include the SSPX.

  • Bruce

    Even if the SSPX is reconciled it won’t last very long. The pride that is evident even in the more moderate statements of Fellay (versus the other bishops) shows that their understanding of the Tradition is the only possible one for them and that the only purpose of reconciliation is to destroy from within any influence of the Second Vatican Council. They patently hold Papal Primacy only in the speculative order, and not in the practical (moral order), and would eventually go into rebellion again. They have already spat upon the good will of the Pope, and acted as if they, the hierarchical inferiors of the Successor of Peter, were his equal, even his superior.

    I therefore strongly reject that they have anything like an authentic understanding of Tradition or an authentic zeal. Their understanding is according to their own tastes and their zeal is for that understanding. That is not Catholicism, but fundamentalism.

  • Vatican II “not Catholic”


    The authority of the Roman Catholic Church is dogmatically founded upon Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, the two fonts of the Deposit of Faith. The Catholic Faith does not exist in contemporary Vatican II inventions and indigenous deviations, as promoted by the Holy See and sacrilegiously compounded by its charges throughout the world.

    Self-indicted by its profound contempt of the Traditional Latin Mass, the only remedy for the errors of Vatican II is unequivocal repudiation. The Roman Curia has devolved into further apostasy in its liturgy, doctrine, and sacraments since the time Archbishop Lefebvre initially called Vatican II “not Catholic”. Vatican II and its derivatives must therefore be soundly rejected by, not subsumed in, the Traditional Catholic Faith.

    The traditional Catholic faithful cannot eliminate Vatican II apostasy by collaborating over the Traditional Latin Mass and the true Sacraments. The notion of an accommodation between Vatican II modernism and Sacred Tradition is fundamentally flawed, because Vatican II is intentionally designed to dismantle the Traditional Latin Mass, the true Sacraments, Catholic morality, and even traditional Church aesthetics. Therefore, I reject the liturgical abomination designed by the architects of Vatican II and presupposed for action without canonical authority. I reject the surreptitious corruption by Vatican II of the Traditional Latin Mass, the Sacraments, and the Catechism.


    On my behalf and for those whom God has made me responsible, I hereby petition the Bishops of the Society of Saint Pius the Tenth to cease and withdraw from all further communications with the Roman Curia and its representatives concerning the status of the Society of Saint Pius the Tenth until such time as the Holy See and the Roman Curia unconditionally disavow Vatican II and conclusively demonstrate their rehabilitated conduct according to the traditional canons, rites and dogma of the Holy Roman Catholic Church prior to the apostasy of Vatican II.

  • Dolorosa

    Deo Gratias! Rome is in apostasy. We still await the full 3rd Secret: and the consecration of Russia as Our Lady of Fatima requested. Pray for the Pope to fully come back to Tradition.

  • crazylikeknoxes

    Pure as angels, proud as devils.

  • James H. Dobbins

    One of the potential problems if the situation lingers is that we will have another group like the Orthodox with valid sacraments but a rejection of the authority of the Church. The other potential problem is that the rebellious nature of the SSPX bishops will seep throughout the SSPX and we will see splintering within itself, much like what we saw with the early stages of Protestantism. It will be a mess.
    What many do not understand is that Pius XII had already begun a study of the Mass and how it could be properly modernized. Some considerations were to have the Epistle and Gospel read only once, in the vernacular, instead of once in Latin and once in the vernacular.
    Very little in the documents of Vatican supported the wholesale changes eventually made to the Mass. The Vatican II commission set out to consider which prayers of the Mass should be in the vernacular so as to encourage more fruitful participation of the faithful. The commission was composed almost exclusively of translators. There was no intent to change the form of the sacraments, such as the rite of ordination to the priesthood, including the consecration of the hands of the priest.
    After the commission began, Bugnini was brought in and he fired all the translators and brought in theater experts and even had some Protestant advisors. We all know the result. Six years after the Mass was changed, Pope Paul VI issued a scathing letter excoriating the liturgical abuses which had already crept in even in this short time. But nothing changed and we had clown Masses and the other abuses we have all heard about or might even have seen.
    John Paul II began to try to change this, prompted by Ratzinger. Many Bishops resisted him strongly, operating on their own agenda instead of the good of the Church, and as a consequence many of the things he tried to do never came to fruition.
    But if you read Benedict’s two books, Feast of Faith and The Spirit of the Liturgy, written 20 years apart but entirely consistent in what they teach, you can see how disturbed Benedict was by the changes and the complete lack of basis for nearly all of them. He complains bitterly about the plethora of Eucharistic Prayers, for example, and the ad orientum position of the priest as being liturgically illogical. He does make the point, and it seems consistent with Pius XII’s intent, that it is proper to move the Mass forward to reflect the growing body of Saints and to recognize that we are moving closer to the Second Coming. The open permission granted to priests to offer the Extraordinary Form of the Mass without needing the bishop’s permission, and the changes he has made to bring the current Ordinary Form closer to the Tradition Mass in spirit are both commendable. It seems what he is trying to do is gradually bring the two together so there will only be one, and it will be as close as possible to the Traditional Mass.
    What disturbs me is the stubbornness of the SSPX bishops in not recognizing what Benedict is doing and working with him to accomplish this. Their “our way or the highway” attitude is unbecoming of any Christian, and certainly in a priest or bishop. Any act rooted in such pride is never acceptable. No matter how “pure” their stated motives may be, the way they are going about it proves pride is at the root, and ecclesiastical actions rooted in pride are never beneficial to anyone.

  • Theo

    Please cease with the “unbecoming of a Christian” comments! St. Paul would be “unbecoming” then in your eyes. Catholicism is Tradition and the ordinary and extraordinary magisterium handed down over 2,000 years. It has nothing to do with the idea that it’s “our way or the highway”. It is the Catholic Tradition and magisterium or the highway. Why is that so difficult to think through? Catholicism has nothing to do with bending forwards and backwards to please man-made religions; be they “christian” or pagan. If Catholics want to be Baptists or Methodists or Russian orthodox, or whatever other religion, they can move to those churches. It has nothing to do with pride and everything to do with what Catholicism has taught for centuries. Again, I can’t believe people’s thinking is that muddied…but the proof is in the proverbial pudding. People haven’t a clue what Catholicism is anymore.

  • Berghof

    Those who are absolutely certain that the SSPX are motivated by pride ought to examine their consciences on the subject of rash judgment.

  • Jimmy Mac

    Well, as Roy and Dale used to say: “Good-bye. Good luck. And the may the Good Lord take a likin’ to ya.”

    I’ll add: don’t let the door hit your a**es on your way out.

  • Mark D.

    I can’t understand for the life of me why the Pope entrusts something this important to a Cardinal. With all the back-stabbing they apparently do, of course they are going to sabotage this.

  • John Pollard

    Why waste the time and energy on these people anyway, if they think they are right,
    then on judgement day they will find out how wrong they are. let them go and forget them,but you can pray for them

  • Frank M. Rega

    I find it hard to really believe that the “church pacifist” of Vatican II is one and the same with the traditional “Church Militant.” There is enough room for doubt that it would be a shame if one of the last holdouts for the True Faith voluntarily subjects itself to yoke of the VII modernist hierarchy. I am against this “merge” not on the grounds of sede-vacante, but on the grounds that there is serious evidence for “ecclesia-vacante,” that is, that the True Church no longer resides in the Vatican.

  • JT

    Anti-Semitism on the part of the SSPX? Nothing could be farther from the truth. I for one attend their Holy Mass since i left the modern “mess” some 8 years ago and will never go back and have never, ever heard one comment that could be misconstrued as anti-Semitc, which in itself is a farce of a statement. Further, the talamud loving jews have elevated the bloated and exaggerated Holocaust to being the seminal point in history to the exclusion of Our Lord’s Crucifixion. Anti-Semitic…..please…enough of that tripe!

  • Brother Juniper

    Benedict XVI certainly seems to be a Pope of Christian Unity, calling home both the SSPX and the LCWR and establishing the Anglican Ordinariate. I wish him well on all three fronts. I cannot help but think that we need the SSPX more than they need us.

  • Mouse

    How do we know that this priest’s letter actually states the facts regarding what Fellay said or didn’t say? I don’t recall any such announcement of refusal to sign from Fellay himself, since the 13th, and I believethere will be such an announcement directly from him when he has decided. He is the Superior General of SSPX after all!

  • Alphonsus Jr.

    Note the hidden bias in this article. It’s revealed in the comments regarding anti-semitism. But it’s not anti-semitic to recognize the perfidy of the Jews in killing God Incarnate, nor is it anti-semitic to pray for the salvation of the Jews. It’s anything but anti-semitic.

  • azul condor

    If this report is true, then the million rosaries requested by the good Bishop Fellay have generated enough response from Heaven to show him the right way.

    People still do not know that Benedict VI is still the scheming Modernist progressivist Cardinal Ratzinger of Vatican II who criticized two of the greatest Popes in history, who claimed that the Church should demolish Her dogmas, who contradicted Jesus Christ Himself by suggesting that non-Christians need not be baptized into the Catholic Church, and who lied and tried to hide and twist the Message Of Our Lady of Fatima, in conspiracy with pretenders like Bertone and Sodano.
    Hopefully, when his attemps to snare the SSPPX have finally been put to a disappointing close, Catholics will have recognized who this pope really is, and exposed for what he really is.

  • Frcaco

    Let us Read meditate and be taught by the gospels. I pray that the church of the Acts of the apostles inspire us all to be one as “the Father and I are one” says the Lord. Be more prayerful and pray for each other as st.peter and st.paul. You dont need to live under one roof nor work under.the same shop. But be brothers to each other. By the love you have, each one outdoing each other in showing respect then all will know that you possess the Spirit of Jesus Christ.

  • ttpm

    Bishop Fellay did not ‘spat’ on the Pope, he is negotiating an agreement. If ‘Bruce’ or others believe he ‘spat’ on him, then what do they think of the hundreds of bishops around the world that ignore the Holy Father’s leadership? I suggest you are not thinking clearly at all.

    Keep in mind the that the SSPX has prayed 3 Rosary Crusades for the Holy Father; 1.7 million in 2009, 12 million in 2011 and another 12 million ending this summer (final numbers are not in). I am sorry to say that I am unaware of any other group/parish/diocese that have expressed their love for the Holy Father in this manner. And of course, the SSPX prays for the Holy Father at every Mass.

    For those who believe the SSPX are disobedient, proud, renegades, schismatics or worse, read about the SSPX and ‘state of necessity’ at the SSPX website,, you will understand much about their love for our Church.

    Finally, the tripe about the SSPX being ‘anti-semitic’ is very telling; it means the Society’s enemies realize they are wrong and are resorting to name calling. If you look up Bp. Williamson’s comments, he did not ‘deny’ the Holocaust, he questioned the 6 million dead figure.


  • McCoy

    I cringe every time I comb through the comments on articles of this type because it invariably brings out the traitorous Sedevacantists. It always irks me because their battle cry is the same as Martin Luther’s, Judas Iscariot’s, and Lucifer’s: “I will not serve”. Like Martin Luther they set themselves up as little Popes decreeing everyone else is a heretic. Like Judas Iscariot they pretend to be faithful Catholics but at every turn they attempt to subvert it to their own ends. Like Lucifer they try and hide their lies under a cloak of deception. The last one bothers me the most since it has on occasion gone beyond mere deception at times, for example, the petition put out in England to petition Bishop Fellay not to sign in which the person running the petition simply grabbed the names of people he knew to attend the SSPX and put them as a signer of his petition. Such subterfuge is far from “sensus Catholicus”. I always wonder why people cannot readily see the answer to this question: What is the difference between a Sedevacantists and Modernists? Answer: There isn’t one. They both act as if there was no Pope, no Church, and no authority above their personal one they made up for themselves.

    That said, I was shocked to see Bishop Fellay attacked for being arrogant. If it had been of the other four bishops especially Bishop Williamson I might has said there may be some truth in it. I suspect that those who accuse him of it simply cannot see the difference between standing up and insisting on the truth no matter what, and apparently Rome must think there must be some truth in what the SSPX say because otherwise after two years of discussion why would they try so hard to reconcile if they thought they were arrogant stubborn fools who did not have the faith and had no interest of acquiring it. Also, don’t be so quick to think that Bishop Fellay’s refusal to sign with be the end of this, because I am very certain that both Pope Benidict XVI and Bishop Fellay will continue to try and reconcile. (Just my speculation) I strongly suspect the document that was changed at the last minute and was changed against the wishes of the Holy Father.

  • Si vis pacem para bellum!

    To paraphrase Cato the Elder, “Concilium Vaticanum Secundum delendum est!”

  • McCoy

    Something tells me Cato never said “Second Vatican Council to be destroyed!” since he was a Roman states man before the birth of Christ.

  • Malena

    Why the need for all these documents? Come back in humility, or stay out.

    I don’t make my pastor sign professions of faith; I just have to live with whomever I get, like it or not.

  • Jon Greenier

    I stand with the Holy Father and my loyalty is to the throne of Peter. We can all learn from the Holy Father his love, mercy and compassion dealing with the SSPX should be in inspiration to all true Catholics. He is a true Shepard trying to bring home the Prodigal Son.

    He truly is the new Benedict of this new Dark Age.

    I love you Holy Father.

    My prayers are with you Holy Father.

  • ttpm

    Mr. Greenier,

    The SSPX stands with the Holy Father too, that’s the whole point. The Society actually believes he is a Monarch, not a Bishop among equals as Vatican II lead us all to believe. The SSPX is not willing to believe or teach any ‘ideas’ that contradict 2000 years of Church history and papal teachings.

    Our ancestors gave their lives with gruesome tortures in the Vendee of France to protect the true church from priests that compromised with the government of that time (read Michael Davies book For Altar and Throne: The Rising in the Vendee for a fantastic true story of what men, women and children sacrificed for the True Faith. (Men and women were stripped, bound together (not husband and wife) taken to the middle of the river and drowned while ‘revolutionary’ neighbors laughed on the shoreline). This is the kind of Faith we must reclaim and the SSPX is at the forefront of the fight.


  • LeonG

    The fact that the bishops of The Confraternity are against the deal speaks volumes of itself. It would have been better if Fellay had trusted them sooner and discussed the details with them. Archbishop Lefebvre wisely left 4 bishops to work together to protect and propagate the Traditional Sacraments, in the first place, and he certainly did not intend the Superior General to be a bishop thus complicating any future talks with The Vatican. The attempt to make Fellay look totally immaculate here is disingenuous. This is a fraternal association and he is not in absolute control.
    The Remnant is wrong and so is the conclusion it draws from this affair. The process has been flawed in allowing to much authority to the Superior General and it was a major ‘faux pas’ to exclude the three other bishops.

  • Greyghost

    The Catholic Church needs the SSPX to balance the modernist/liberal inclinations of the Spirit of Vatican II. I am very grateful to them for staying true to the long tradition and core beliefs of our Church in times of great upheavel and turmoil within. Clearly, the post-Vat II Church needs to open the vault of tradition to serve as a centerboard for the drifting ship. In time this will happen.

  • Fred

    What this article fails to reveal is that it is based entirely on a “leaked” (or perhaps non-existent) letter, and is not in anyway sanction by the Society of St. Pius the X. So, would all the “loyal” Catholics please take a breath and wait – in charity and for the sake of truth – for the Church to issue a statement as to the status of the negotiations?

  • Bill McEnaney

    To see why the phrase “breakaway group” can mislead readers, please read the sermon Abp. Lefebvre preached the day he consecrated the four bishops in 1988. That sermon proves, in my opinion, that His Grace didn’t break away from the Catholic Church. In the 1983 Code of Canon Law, Canon Law, canon 1323 may even show doubters that Lefebvre didn’t deserve any penalty for the consecrations. If this ( link won’t take you to his sermon, you’ll find it on the “Article Index” page at (

  • Greyghost

    SSPX has always been loyal to the Church and it’s popes. They are almost too loyal to Church teachings to be anything but in Christ. So, I think the dialogue with the Church is a brillant move and guided by the Holy Spirit. It is even more extraordinary that the Pope is working so hard to insert SSPX into the fabric of the Church. Those that feel this is not a good thing, well, please do not lose sight of the mission, “to restore All in Christ” as Archbishop Lefebvre was so clear in saying. Beyond that, well, everything else is a self serving diversion from our core belief.

    I pray hard that the participants in the talks are filled with Actual Grace. It is my dream that through their efforts we will find real cooperation in the mission of the Church . . . the salvation of souls.

  • Bill McEnaney

    You’ll find canon 1323 when you click on (

  • CradelTrad

    In order to bring the Church back to her former glory, one must know what that is and how to project that to the faithful. That is where the SSPX comes in and the Holy Father knows it. For those who think that Bishop Felley is full of pride, they have clearly not taken the time to listen to him. He, like his predesesser Archbishop Lefevere show nothing but humility and have a clear understanding of the faith they love and the Catholic church they serve. May the Holy Ghost guide Bishop Felley and the Holy Father in their endevor to renew the faith in the Catholic church and restore the throne of Christ the King!

  • Robert

    Israel is an Amenia Holocaust denier, but suffers no stigma. I once read a Jewish writer who questioned the number of Armenians killed by the Turks, no one minded his questioning the Armenian published figures. No one called for him to done sack cloth and ashes. But let someone like bishop Williamson state to someon that he had his doubts about the number of Jews reported slaim, a number that some very thoughtful people had found inflated, and he is branded as a “Holocaust Denier” even though he agrees that the Nazis murdered hundreds of thousand Jews. bishop williamson may have his faults but he does not deny that a holocaust, that is hundreds of thousands of Jews were murdered by the Nazis. And I ask, is denying that the number of Jews murdered was inflated, which even Jewish sources candidly admit, as bad as denying that Christ was God and was crucufied for making this claim.Anyway I always like to see people stick as close as they should in stating the truth. Historians often will dispute claims.

  • christopher.forrester.16

    SSPX “rejects the modernizing reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), including church acceptance of ecumenism and religious freedom, and its rejection of anti-Semitism”. It is absolutely crucial any reporter UNDERSTANDS the issues before writing. The quote above is off the target. Ecumenism? I think the SSPX rejects a false and syncretistic type of Ecumenism. Religious Freedom…must be conformed to the teaching of the Church and other Church councils. The SSPX is not “anti Semitic”. that is a racial category and Catholic do not adhere to racism. The SSPX does not hate Jews and like Pope Pius XII (whom Archbishop Lefevre was close to) despise any hatred of Jews. Bishop Williamson is in exile and incidentally was an Anglican before joining the SSPX. He is not respected or listened to as he is a very foolish man.
    The SSPX are Catholic but are traumatised by the acknowledged abuses going on the the rest of the Catholic Church. Judging by some comments here they have some enemies to fear!

  • TaylorKH

    For their obstinance, rebellion and lack of respect for the infallibility of the Pope ruling ex cathedra, let them be anathema.

  • dweebken

    With deep respect, have a look at the photos in the article. I for one see the respectful celebration of the Holy Eucharist. Who’s the argument over? We are like lost little children in here, arguing over who is loved more by the Father. Or who loves Him more. SSPX do have their points which need to be heard and understood in good faith. I’m not learned enough in doctrine to know how to resolve the issues, but I pray for the Holy Spirit to guide those who do, or should, genuinely know the doctrine to make their best effort to resolved this, for the sake of our souls.

  • Tim

    This Sunday go and see for your self, find a SSPX Chapel near you. Look and see if the fruit is good. If it is then it can only be of God.

  • JudeThom

    The SSPX is the true Church–it has the right Mass, it holds true to Tradition, no Novus Ordo innovations like altar girls, communion in hand, a hybrid Protestant-Catholic liturgy, quasi-Protestant hymns. The altars in SSPX churches have not been transformed into kitchen tables or butcher blocks, and then the priest says Mass he faces East not the people as in the Novus ordo Protestant-Catholic hybrid Mass with all those lay ministers.

  • JudeThom

    God bless the SSPX. It maintains Tradition just like the Orthodox–no altar girls, lay ministers, wreck-o-vated churches, communion in hand.

    The Novus Ordo Mass is in schism!

  • John “Ratty” Arbuckle

    I pray the two sides can reach an agreement soon. I also pray that the Anglicans and Orthodox will soon (within my lifetime) achieve Union with Rome.

    I have a feeling we need to be One in order to face and fight the rising tide of irreligious, anti-Catholic, anti-Christian, secular-humanist, atheist, and Satanic hordes both here and around the world.

  • Robert

    It is related in the Fatima Crusader #80,p.32, & #92,p.7 : Fr. Bollinger, personal friend of then Cardinal Ratzinger and JPII, Theologian and Seminary Professor, after concelebrating a mass in 2000 with then Card. Ratzinger, asked him if all of the Fatima Secret was divulged, to which Card. Ratzinger said: [In the Third Secret Our Lady warns that there will be an evil council. And sShe warned against the changes; She warned against making changes in the liturgy; changes in the Mass. This is explicitly set forth in the Third Secret.]
    To the Catholic Mystics & Stigmatics Marie-Julie Jahenny and Blessed Catherine Emmerich, Our Lord told them that a “New Mass” would come in the future which would be “Odious & Impious” in His sight. Ven. Marianna de Jesus Torres said in the 16th Cent. that in the 20th Century the sacraments, mass, all the faith would be corrupted and assailed by the hierarchy that a great Apostasy would envelope the Church which has is now in full force as Rome abandons 2000 years of the faith for what the Church condemned as modernism the “syntheses of all errors”.
    To Blessed Elena Aiello, at Akita, Our Lord and Our Lady have warned that God is about to severely punish, the Church and the world for the great Apostasy from the faith by the Hierarchy, Rome, and the laity and the many rampant sins of today.

  • John

    In the words of Brother Juniper | Jun 27, 2012 | 4:36pm
    ‘Benedict XVI certainly seems to be a Pope of Christian Unity, calling home both the SSPX and the LCWR and establishing the Anglican Ordinariate.  I wish him well on all three fronts.  I cannot help but think that we need the SSPX more than they need us.’ Unquote

    In principle I agree with the rest of the above statement but as a Catholic, I don’t quite agree with the last sentence. SSPX needs a Pope. Without the Pope, the Vicar of Christ on earth, where would they be? Therefore in the best interest of unity of one flock under one shepherd of our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI we need them(SSPX) as much as they need us. Let’s be united first and let theologians and church leaders from both sides sort out any minor differences later. Let’s pray that the Pope of our time Pope Benedict XVI will be able to accomplish this.

  • Archie Green

    I’m not really in a position to judge what really happened to our 0ne, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church today. But if only you, the reader would read more about what actually transpired from the beginning then you can make your own conclusion yourself. And I’d like to recommend the following documents before anything else:

    The Third Secret of Fatima, Parts I, II,III,IV and V;
    Freemasonry and the New Mass;
    Comparison between The Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus 0rdo;
    Why the Traditional Latin Mass? Why Not the New?
    Why Latin;
    The Ecumenical Corruption of the Chair of Unity 0ctave;
    Contrast between Pope St. Pius X and John Paul II, Parts I and II;
    The Evils of Freemasonry Exposed;
    The Pope at the Mosque – a Scandal;
    Holy Mass and the Novus 0rdo Missae – Is it valid?
    Latin: An Indispensable Factor of Unity;
    Why the NewRite of 0rdination is Invalid;
    Quo Primum;
    The Catholic Church Ravaged in the Fourth Century;
    Hostility to Catholicism in Russia;
    The NOVUS ORDO Mass Broke the Identity of the Church;
    Exposing the Pseudo-Catholic Church of Vatican II;
    Third Secret of Fatima Explained: Part I
    New Age Movement;
    Real Catholics Follow St. Peter up to Pius XII;
    Murder at the Vatican;
    Justice Will be Heard;
    White Smoke But No Pope;
    Statistical Decline of the Catholic Church since Vatican II;
    News for the Church in Eclipse;
    Christians Beware of Freemasonry;
    The New Mass: A Flavor of Protestantism;
    Food for Thought – Communion in the Hand…Why?
    “Satan would enter into the highest realms of the heirarchy…”
    Fr. Malachi Martin affirmed: Satanism has been practiced in Vatican;
    Masons Control the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church;
    “The Deception of the Century”;
    Papal Infallibility;
    Traditionalists, Infallibility and the Pope;
    True Papal Restoration;
    and, many more.

    And yet Vatican II Church would want us to believe that it is the true Catholic Church. It is creating confusion around the world! Worse, it is turning the truth around by telling Traditionalists to “reconcile and have full communion with Rome”. Why don’t they stop the heresy and sacrilegious practices and return Tradition to the 0ne, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church? Didn’t St. Paul say, “Stand firm and hold fast to tradition”? Lastly, in the past seven months I’ve been looking for anything to read that will brighten their side but there’s none.

  • Archie Green

    Erratum: Third Secret of Fatima and the Post-Conciliar Debacle, Parts I,II,III,IV and V instead of just “Third Secret of Fatima, Parts I,II,III,IV and V”. Thanks.