FSSR MUST BEARD LEO THE LION IN HIS DEN OF INIQUITY

To comment please open your gmail account or use my email address, FB Messenger or X.

How can a Catholic tolerate Leo XIV - the 'pope' who maintains the Vatican II revolution, panders to the  pretender Protestant archbishopette Sarah Mullaly and sundry other heretics, who chooses cardinals and bishops only slightly to the right of Gustavo Gutiérrez - and who squats, as he does, on the Chair of St Peter?

Worse still: how can a Catholic accept that Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, the soft-porn scribbler who inspired Fiducia Supplicans, is suited to prosecution of the uber-traditional, faithful Society of St Pius X (SSPX) and the Transalpine Redemptorist Order (FSSR), for crimes against the faith? Said 'crimes' being the former's intention of episcopal consecrations to preserve the faith that Rome intends to destroy, and the latter's declaration of sede vacante: "Leo is no pope and these churchmen do not obey God."

The FSSR's Father Michael Mary Sim says the Novus Ordo Mass has desensitised Catholics to the errors of Vatican II, as many other commentators maintain it was designed (by the widely acknowledged Freemason Annibale Bugnini) to do; to persuade the faithful to swallow these insults, to themselves as members of the body of Christ, and to their crucified Lord as its Head.

But if Chris Jackson of Hiraeth in Exile has his way, the FSSR will turn Rome's prosecution of the FSSR into so many heretical chickens coming home to roost. Canon 1720, Jackson says, requires that in an extrajudicial penal process, the accused be informed of the accusation and proofs, and be given an opportunity for defense. 

The FSSR should demand Rome "explain why Fiducia Supplicans is Catholic, why Abu Dhabi is Catholic, why Francis in Singapore was Catholic, why Leo’s interreligious program is Catholic, why the Synodal Church is Catholic, and why Fernández is fit to guard doctrine." You could say that would be an enjoyable exercise in table-turning. 

And while any Catholic who's awake will have heard rumours of Fernández' purple prose, Jackson provides EWTN News' exposé of same which decency forbids publishing here but you can read it for yourself. If you care to.https://bigmodernism.substack.com/p/an-open-letter-to-the-transalpine

From Radical Fidelity:

The Transalpine Redemptorists of Papa Stronsay were presented as the model of “traditionalism in full communion”, for nearly two decades.

 

Founded in the orbit of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, regularized under Benedict XVI, and canonically recognized as the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer, they were held up as proof that one could preserve Tradition while remaining peacefully inside the post-conciliar structure.

 

 

“The pirates have boarded the ark of Peter. There is no room for us on the deck. We must climb to the high mast for safety.”

That experiment has now publicly collapsed. In their May 2026 declaration, The Dogma to Steer By, following their explosive October 2025 Open Letter, the monks have effectively crossed the line into a sedevacantist position: the post-conciliar claimants, they correctly argue, have imposed a religion incompatible with Catholic dogma, and Catholics cannot obey commands destructive of the Faith. The practical conclusion is unmistakable: the authority claiming to govern the Church is not functioning as Catholic authority at all.

 

Keep in mind that this is not the rhetoric of anonymous internet polemicists but the conclusion of a religious congregation that spent years trying to make “recognize and resist” work from inside the system.

 

The Redemptorist Inheritance

 

The original Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer was founded in 1732 by St. Alphonsus Liguori, Doctor of the Church, to preach missions especially to the poor and abandoned. The Redemptorists were marked by doctrinal clarity, missionary zeal, Marian devotion, and fierce opposition to the theological laxity of their age.

 

The Transalpine Redemptorists were founded in 1988 by Fr. Michael Mary Sim, originally as a traditional Redemptorist community attached to the wider SSPX world and encouraged by Archbishop Lefebvre’s resistance to modernism. Their purpose was simple: preserve the old Redemptorist life, the traditional Roman Mass, and the anti-modernist Catholic Faith.

 

Eventually they settled on Papa Stronsay, a remote island in Orkney, building Golgotha Monastery.

 

In 2008, encouraged by Benedict XVI and the apparent thaw represented by Summorum Pontificum, they sought reconciliation with Rome. Their canonical censures were lifted, and in 2012 Bishop Hugh Gilbert of Aberdeen erected them as a diocesan institute under the name Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer.

 

For conservatives, they became the poster child of canonical normalization. That status is now in ruins.

 

When the Illusion Broke

 

The recent crisis did not begin with Francis, though Francis made it impossible to ignore.

 

The pressure intensified through years of conflict over liturgy, authority, and doctrinal compromise. Their apostolate in New Zealand became especially contentious. In Christchurch, tensions with diocesan authorities escalated until Bishop Michael Gielen expelled them from the diocese in July 2024.

 

Officially, the issue was framed as obedience and unity. In reality, traditional Catholics recognized the familiar pattern: canonical recognition lasts only so long as one behaves like a museum exhibit rather than a Catholic priesthood.

 

Then came October 2025. Their Open Letter was not yet a formal sedevacantist declaration, but the premises were already there.

 

They wrote: “Through years of trials and experience we have come to the unfortunate conclusion that the Traditional Catholic Faith, and the way of life and worship which is its natural expression, is incompatible with the new, modern Church. They simply cannot coexist.”

 

That sentence alone destroyed the polite fiction. They continued: “The chain of command has been broken.” And: “We can no longer remain silent while the Faith is undermined and the sacred priesthood is reduced to a functionary of a new religion.”

 

Then the line that many had thought, but few clergy dared to print: “We will not be complicit by silence in this ongoing destruction of the Church.” Once that was admitted, the rest became a matter of logic.

 

the heresy of religious indifferentism

 

The Dogma to Steer By

 

The May 2026 declaration simply says openly what the earlier letter implied. The monks insist first on a fundamental Catholic principle: “Authority in the Church is ministerial. It is not absolute. It exists to hand on faithfully what has been received, not to innovate, manipulate, or destroy.” This statement is completely in line with Catholic teaching as espoused at Vatican I.

 

Then comes the inevitable conclusion and application: “When a superior departs from his own obedience to Christ the King, his command is no longer the arm of Christ but the gesture of a man.” This is of course the death blow to the conservative slogan “the Pope must be obeyed no matter what.” No, authority binds only insofar as it serves the Deposit of Faith.

 

 

Does Leo remind anyone of a certain member of the animal kingdom?

 

They continue: “If the shepherd commands what destroys the flock, he is not acting as shepherd.” And still more plainly: “These churchmen disobey God.” The document therefore serves, in no uncertain terms, as a judgment against the hierarchy, showing it has become an instrument of contradiction to the very Faith it claims to guard.

 

The monks then return to the liturgical question, where the revolution became visible to ordinary Catholics: “Tolle Missam, Tolle Ecclesiam. Take away the Mass, you destroy the Church.” They explain: “The attack on the immemorial Roman Rite was never merely disciplinary. It was doctrinal. The lex orandi was changed because the lex credendi had first been altered.”

 

The Public Repudiations

 

Then follows their explosive list:

“We repudiate Amoris Laetitia, which places human affection above divine law.”

“We repudiate Traditionis Custodes, which persecutes what the Church herself canonized.”

“We repudiate Fiducia Supplicans, which attempts to bless what God condemns.”

“We repudiate ‘the Synodal Church’ as distinct from the Divinely constituted Catholic Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ.”

 

The final line is crucial as they are saying what so many of us has been saying , or at least been thinking, for a very long time: something distinct from the Church is presenting itself as the Church.

 

“Whatever may be the cost to us, with the Apostle we must say: even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel other than that which you have received, let him be anathema,” reads their final apostolic note.

 

The Confession That Matters Most

 

Perhaps the single most important line in the document is the confession of their own former hope: “We believed it was possible to live as faithful children of Tradition within the structures of the modern Church, preserving the old Mass and the old Faith while remaining under authorities who no longer believed either. We did not know how wrong we were.”

 

Critics who just want to dismiss these godly men, must really take a moment and consider the following. These are not lifelong sedevacantists looking for confirmation, but men who tried the Benedict solution.

 

They accepted regularization and they spent seventeen years inside the Ecclesia Dei framework until it became unbearably clear that they were in communion with something alien to the Catholic Church. Now they are saying it does not work. Their testimony carries a weight that no argument can match.

 

The Not-so-quiet Part

 

For years, many clergy attempted to maintain the fiction that one could indefinitely “recognize and resist”: acknowledge the authority, reject its commands, denounce its teaching, but never draw the theological conclusion.

 

The Transalpine Redemptorists are saying the conclusion must finally be drawn. If the new religion is incompatible with Catholicism, if the chain of command is broken, if the liturgical revolution destroys the Church’s visible life, and if the authorities commanding these things “disobey God,” then Catholics cannot continue pretending this is merely a bad papacy.

 

Papa Stronsay has now added their voice to the choir of those who declare that the Synodal Church is not the Catholic Church and said the not-so-quiet part very loud indeed. The time has come that more hear, and heed, this message.

Note: I know by the time of this article being published many have already covered the story, such as my colleagues Stephen Kokx and WM Review, but if you haven’t read the document yet, do so by clicking here.

Our Lady, Co-redemptrix, pray for us…

Our Lady, Mediatrix of all Graces, pray for us…

Viva Christo Rey!

ALSO READ:

Leo XIV’s Communist Petticoat Hangs Out in New Book

Faithful Polish Catholics Outraged Over Betrayal of Christ in Bishops’ Heretical Letter

The Time Has Come to End Synodal Rome’s Limp-wristed Reign of Terror with This One Courageous Decision

Lest He Tear You to Pieces: A Short Message to the Synodal Spawn who are Breathing Threats of Excommunication Against the Faithful

 

“The pirates have boarded the ark of Peter. There is no room for us on the deck. We must climb to the high mast for safety.”

 From a pretty astute reader ("over the transom" as Ann Barnhardt would say)"

  

I don't know if the FSSR are correct in the final conclusions they draw in their declaration. But after the events of the last 13 years, it is possible that they may be, at least in part, correct.

 

My questions, comments and observations:

 

Vatican II is distinct from "the spirit of Vatican II". One was a Non-binding, Ecumenical Council on pastoral care. The other is the implementation not of the formal documents of Vatican II but of the call to align the Church to the modern world. This "realignment" was a process, it occurred over time.

 

The ultimate goal of "the spirit of Vatican II" is not to implement the conciliar Church' but rather to prepare the Church to accept the "process of change" and its "democratization." The purpose was to prepare the church faithful to reject the Church's hierarchical structure, aka the Apostolic Mark, replacing it with the new mark of democracy, aka Synodality.

How much, (if at all), each Pope, Cardinal, Bishop, Priest taught the heresy of Modernism and whether they knew it was heretical depends on that individual. Note that the Church doesn’t/can't teach heresy, it is the individual/s who teaches heresy.

Like the battleship which is the Barque of St Peter, the Church is designed to take a lot of damage and abuse and still remain intact and unsinkable, continuing on with her mission. In an emergency the Church supplies Jurisdiction. 

 

(Below is a theoretical litmus test. It is not perfect, but will distinguish between those that belong to Christ and those that don’t. (Warning, it's a theoretical question only - don't actually try to test it!)

 

Have Novus Ordo priests (when properly authorized by the diocesan bishop), conducted successful exorcisms?

 

Yes, they have, although reportedly not as easily as pre-Vatican II priests did. Only the Church has the authority to exorcise: the Protestant churches do not. Once the separation of the Church and the new Synodal church is completed, only the Church that belongs to Jesus Christ will have the authority to do so.

 

 

Vatican’s new Synodal document just crossed a line, elevated homosexual testimony, redefined sin, and demands a total “paradigm shift” away from Catholic teaching.

 

The “Synodal Church” is a new church. It denies one of the four Marks of the Church. The Novus Ordo does not; it stops short of denying the Church's hierarchical nature. While the Novus Ordo Church is "conciliar", it still remains Apostolic. From Christ to the bishops.

 

Both the Novus Ordo/Vatican II Church and the new Synodal church are based on moral relativism and sentimentalism. Modernism does not deny anything, it is all about what a person feels is right for them at that time. The nature of the modernist heresy is that it ultimately does not believe in any external objective truth. The conciliar Church prepared the faithful for the Synodal church.

 

A feature of the modernist attack on the Church is that it moved slowly. So slowly that the faith of the shepherds and the sheep was eroded, not rapidly changed. The change is so gradual that without realizing it, most of the faithful openly accept it as normal.

 

So, the questions are:

 

1. Which, if any, of the post Vatican II Popes, Paul VI through to Benedict XVI, crossed over to openly manifest heresy, or apostasy?

 

                  Francis was an Antipope. I am almost certain Leo XIV is also an antipope. If so then the Holy See is currently vacant and the cardinals (those remaining who have not apostatized by joining the new Synodal church) will need to elect a pope. If there is none left in the Church, or they won't elect a Pope, then an Imperfect General Council would need to be called to elect a new Pope.

 

FYI, (It is my understanding) that between Feb 2014 and Sep 2023 all cardinals appointed by Francis were also received and blessed and appointed by Pope Benedict XVI on the same day.

 

Only the 21 most recently-named cardinals were "appointed" by Francis after Pope Benedict's death, lowering the number at any putative conclave to fewer than the required 120. However, in the past, cardinals appointed by an antipope have later been ruled valid, due to the Church supplying the authority.

 

2. What about the post-Vatican II Holy Orders and Sacraments? Does the Church supply Jurisdiction?

 

 

Final Observation:

The Church Triumphant, the Church Penitent, and the Church Militant are all one Church. (They therefore have the same canon). The head of the Church is not separate from the body. Christ, who is Truth, does not change, therefore neither does the Church. 

 

The SSPX is often accused of being in "an irregular canonical relationship with the post-Vatican Council II Novus Ordo Church" which occupies the Vatican. The accusation made against the SSPX - that they are not in schism but rather in an “irregular canonical relationship” - is a very useful "confession through projection."

 

The SSPX has not changed from the “pre-Vatican II” Church, which was and still is one with the Church Triumphant and Church Penitent.

 

Therefore it is the Novus Ordo Church which is in "an irregular canonical relationship” with the rest of the Church, and with its High Priest Jesus Christ. https://papastronsay.blogspot.com/2026/05/the-dogma-to-steer-by.html?m=1https://papastronsay.com/resources/documents/The%20Dogma%20to%20Steer%20By.pdf

 

 

 Lord Jesus Christ, crucified for us, have mercy on us