Wednesday, 6 May 2026

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

https://papastronsay.blogspot.com/2026/05/the-dogma-to-steer-by.html?m=1https://papastronsay.com/resources/documents/The%20Dogma%20to%20Steer%20By.pdf


 


“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.

 

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

 

 

Final Observations:

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. 


For a person to hold the Office of the Papacy that person must 1) be a Man, and 2) be within the Catholic Church. Hence the Pope must be Catholic. If a valid Pope ceases to be Catholic, either by manifesting apostasy or heresy, then by his own actions he loses the Office. The public manifestation of heresy or apostasy is their resignation.

  

When the Holy See is vacant a man who is outside the Church cannot become Pope. Christ holds the Office when it is vacant and will not bestow the authority of the Office on a man who is outside the Church. It does not matter how many Cardinals vote for that person - as long as they remain outside the Church they are not in Communion with Christ. Christ will not bestow the Authority of His Church on a man outside His Church.

 

 

As St Joan of Arc said "Act, and God will Act."

 

As ordered by Our Lord Jesus Christ and Our Holy Mother, The Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima, the Faithful need to pray the Rosary daily, Complete the Five Fits Saturday Devotion with the intention of making reparation to the Our Holy Mothers Immaculate Heart, do penance and acts of contrition.


The Faithful were ordered to do this. Few have and Russia has not yet been consecrated. Now the Heresy of Modernism has entered the Church and we now have "an Apostasy from the Top." This will only be ended through obeying Christ and Our Holy Mother.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

 

37 comments:

  1. You’re a clown Julia

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sharon Juenemann6 May 2026 at 16:29


    Leo XIII and Leo XIV are 180degrees out of phase. One warned of modernism. The other is promoting liberals and leaving the faithful priests behind.

    ReplyDelete

  3. We can not wait another 70 yrs of V2 DECEPTION.
    Bergoglio was considered a heretic for claiming that all paths of religion lead to God. That’s a fact, and he’s deceased. Additionally, there is an inquiry concerning the legitimacy of Benedict’s resignation.
    We must come together with the Trans Alpine monks, gather all the Bishops for a Council, choose a valid Catholic Pope, and proclaim V2 a deceptive and a false religion.
    The SSPX could contribute significantly if they participate in this struggle, but unfortunately, they are compromised by bishops colluding with the V2 false religion
    Transalpine Redemptorists Call For 'Imperfect Council' To 'Restore Order To The Church'
    https://youtu.be/Q9ZLs-kl7eQ?si=d55BC-ZeGNcnEKPx

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cheryl Enrile Lopez6 May 2026 at 23:26


      Ma Ruthski who are the compromised bishops you are referring to? Bishops from the SSPX?

      Delete

    2. Cheryl Enrile Lopez i think you can tell by what they promote. “We can understand V2 95% the Catholic way”. If you ask me i don’t want to be 95% Catholic .
      The SSPX can not remain Novus Ordo and not obey. They either leave and declare the V2 religion a deception and Leo NOT a Catholic POPE or STAY and OBEY. They cannot have both.
      https://youtube.com/shorts/0cad5tTY_Do?si=UTfWRtgHeOI-yucO

      Delete

  4. I notice Anthony Stine in the thumbnail https://youtu.be/G5V3hY7c5yA?si=l9T0e_1xjlqbNnqH

    ReplyDelete

  5. Dissenters would do well, for the sake of their souls, to note what is said in the papal bull Unam Sanctam: "Unam sanctam is a papal bull that was issued by Pope Boniface VIII on 18 November 1302. It laid down dogmatic propositions on the unity of the Catholic Church, the necessity of belonging to it for eternal salvation, the position of the Pope as supreme head of the Church and the duty thence arising of submission to the Pope in order to belong to the Church and thus to attain salvation." So submission to the Pope is required in order to belong to the Church. "The main propositions of the Bull are the following: First, the unity of the Church and its necessity for salvation are declared and established by various passages from the Bible and by reference to the one Ark of the Flood, and to the seamless garment of Christ. The pope then affirms that, as the unity of the body of the Church so is the unity of its head established in Peter and his successors. Consequently, all who wish to belong to the fold of Christ are placed under the dominion of Peter and his successors. When, therefore, the Greeks and others say they are not subject to the authority of Peter and his successors, they thus acknowledge that they do not belong to Christ’s sheep."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Greally Brendan6 May 2026 at 18:45


      Janet Curran they're trying to be faithful to eternal Rome but clearly find that loyalty to Francis now Leo a huge contradictory

      Delete

  6. Janet Curran how true that is. As are all pre-Vatican II encyclicals.

    ReplyDelete

  7. I dont expect much from Rebellious Schismatic nutjobs like you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Gil Illigan someday you’ll regret posting that. And I bet you despise “judgmental people too”

      Delete

  8. I have always been supportive of the Sons but just maybe they should be attending more to the needs of their congregation. The news that Brother Ignatius has gone missing presumably drowned is very sad indeed. However, I found this comment from Fr Michael Mary very worrying. "Speaking to New Zealand’s RNZ news, Father Michael said the monk had been “suffering from hypothermia” in recent weeks. He said: “The situation is utterly tragic." It is more than utterly tragic. To me it is irresponsible that Brother Ignatius was left on the island in a state of hypothermia. He should have been removed immediately from the island and cared for. The Sons have stated that they believe Brother Ignatius was suffering from long term hypothermia. Was he expected to just tough it out? The Sons have a duty to their congregation to care for their health and wellbeing as well as their souls. This will hopefully be a lesson but unfortunately it adds weight to the negative comments made about the order.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brother Ignatius wasn't 'left on the island' He lived there with the community. Papa Stronsay was his home. As I - and seemingly the internet - know nothing about 'long term hypothermia' I couldn't comment on that medical condition or its treatment, but I certainly wouldn't rush to judgment of these holy men because one of their number may have died of it.
      The Holy Sons need Catholic sympathy and prayer, not ill-informed rebukes.

      Delete
    2. Regardless of whether the Sons need sympathy and prayer, the fact is it was irresponsible for Brother Ignatius not to have been sent from the cold climes of Papa Stronsay for medical treatment as the Sons stated that they knew he was hypothermic some weeks before. Your comment shows a cavalier attitude towards the welfare of Brother Ignatius whose body has now been found with his death being treated as unexplained.

      Delete

  9. I agree with these comments from the Pillar: "There’s plenty of analysis about the pope’s first year, and plenty more coming. In the meantime, pray for the pope. His is not an easy task, and — contrary to popular opinion — the pope is an ordinary human being, not endowed with superpowers, as he gets used to what must be the most surreal life transition on planet Earth. I once asked a newly retiring bishop if he’d return to his hometown after the installation of his successor, and he was frank: “I’m 75 years old,” he said. “All my doctors are here. At my age, those are some of the most important relationships in my life. So I’m staying here.”
    It was a pragmatic reminder of the unique situation of septuagenarians in the Church’s life. Most guys I know at 70 have wrapped up their careers or are getting ready to. They’re figuring out what the day will look like without the office or shop floor. They’re easing into long put-off hobbies. They’re trying to decide what to do about the sudden increase of ear hair which seems to sprout in the eighth decade of life.
    But imagine that you’re 70, and you’ve got five more years of leading a diocese or a dicastery ahead of you, in which you’re expected to take the helm in a changing world, and to do it well.
    More to the point, imagine that you’re 70, and suddenly you take a new name, your brothers swear allegiance and obedience to you, you’ve got new charisms of unity and infallibility, and people talk about the fact that you could easily stay in that new job for 20 years, or more.
    Accepting the papal office is a call to a kind of martyrdom. Not every pope has accepted that call generously — plenty in history have chosen their own paths instead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Janet Curran (cont.)6 May 2026 at 19:33

      But Leo, after a robust missionary life around the globe, and a few years of hard labor in a Vatican dicastery, seems to have accepted that the last chapter of his life will see him poured out like a libation for the salvation of souls.
      I wouldn’t wish it on anyone — even while I know that once God calls, it’s the particular path which might lead him to salvation.
      As I say, pray for the pope. He needs it." I think it is high time traditional Catholics - so-called - stopped this utter destructive diatribe against the Church. Pope bashing is achieving absolutely nothing. It is only creating more of a split in the Church and probably deterring people from converting. How about writing of some of the positives happening in the Church? Pope Leo has defended marriage, spoken against abortion, against blessings for same sex couples and those living in sin. He has upheld all the moral teachings of the Church despite what some "traditionalists" claim.

      Delete
    2. Janet Curran, you are free to 'agree with the Pillar'. Given their readership, it seems you have company. But not, surely, Latin Massgoers, for whom just that one adjective, "pragmatic" betrays the Novus Ordo mentality/spirituality which would agree with a 75 year-old BISHOP saying "all my doctors" should be "some of the most important relationships in my life." For a 75 year-old bishop his relationship with Jesus Christ and concern for his eternal destiny should far outweigh any concerns for physical health.
      'Accepting the papal office is a call to a kind of martyrdom', yes. But the Pillar utterly misses the point: in reporting Leo's actions, no one is indulging in 'Pope bashing'. He's a pretender 'Pope' and it's he and his predecessors who've caused the split in the Church and deter people from converting.
      Protestants outside the Church understand better than the Protestants within, it seems, that it's Leo's actions which shout louder than his prevarications on the moral teachings of the Church.
      Protestants see Cardinal Fernandez, for example, in charge of the DDF and prosecuting holy priests for crimes against the Faith, and could quite reasonably laugh the Catholic Church to scorn.
      But Protestants quite likely pray for Leo, as all Catholics should.

      Delete
    3. You, Julia, wilfully miss the point made by the Pillar that any 75 year old man, priest or not, would stick close to his doctors - I bet you and your family do. And you obviously never went to a Catholic school otherwise you would know that the Church teaches that “Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them” Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2288.

      Plus, you're a little muddled as the comment of "Pope bashing" is mine, not the Pillar's, and I refer to those who claim to be traditional and Catholic who falsely claim that Pope Leo prevaricates on Catholic moral teaching, which is utterly false as Pope Leo has upheld all Catholic moral teachings. However, as you quote mainly from sedavacantists, I can understand why you have absolutely no clue as to what Pope Leo has actually said. You just copy and paste, ad nauseam, all their falsehoods. Thankfully, none of those I know who attend the Traditional Latin Mass share your misguided views. Those who cite Unam Sanctam while rejecting the Pope, thereby contradict the very doctrine they claim to uphold. This inconsistency is both self‑refuting and a source of scandal and not the view held by Traditional Catholics in good standing in the Church.

      Delete

  10. A tiny group of recalcitrants flounce off and leave the Church because they don’t like the cut of the pope’s jib. It was ever thus. Sad but nothing to see here. Another piece of fetid, anti-Catholic baloney from Ms Julia du Fresne.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies


    1. John Power and can you explain please, how I have left the Church? The Church is my Mother. I would defend her with my life. Like St Teresa of Jesus (Avila), by God's grace I intend to die a daughter of the Church.
      It's not the cut of the jib I don't like; it's the fact that this is obviously not the 'jib' of a pope.

      Delete

    2. Julia du Fresne It takes a genuine hatred for the Church to pen the kind of vile anti-Catholic diatribes you regularly produce.

      Delete
    3. John Power, history will decide who are the anti-Catholics. The passage of time will clarify what you evidently cannot yet comprehend.

      Delete
    4. Greally Brendan8 May 2026 at 15:35


      John Power this "tiny" grates on me. I'm not part of any tiny group. I've heard from Parolin himself in the Vatican this word tiny employed to describe the chinese martyrs. Oh and Austen Iverleigh my neighbour uses tiny to describe the Conservative voices in the synod...after he purges them from group meetings. Ive seen first hand the ones with power misuse their authority to stomp on little people with large families, poor people with great spiritual reserve and offerings. I was just in another post wherein a local abortion activist claimed that anti choices were just a tiny group of radicals as a justification to keep them from large public spaces. And my Bishop shut down the latin masses last year because we were only tiny congregations. Actually ITS true that tiny is a tool of marginalising and finding power isn't that right Sir John Power?

      Delete

    5. Greally Brendan I use the word tiny in it’s absolutely literal sense to describe this now formerly Catholic group. They are, quite simply, very small in number.

      Delete
    6. Greally Brendan8 May 2026 at 15:39


      John Power are they a tiny group? Because I do not see that from here. I think there are concerns from so many in the church. Are you aware thar 551 priests in the UK wrote a letter of concern to Francis on.the heterodox positions he took in his letters? Maybe its far fewer in New Zealand so you can label thek "tiny" or perhaps " irrelevant". But it's interesting that history shows us that small, committed "groups " have often been instrumental in fostering significant change within the Church. Just as early Christians and the monastic movements influenced the faith, contemporary traditionalist groups can be vital in preserving the richness of our Catholic heritage and prompting important discussions.
      I met a nun recently of the Poor Clara's.. she the niece of that Christchurch Bishop. She is unusually loud for a nun. She is so proudly middle of the road like you might claim to be. But she'd have the same words for you as you have for Julia. Because she loves loves Francis letters....she appreciates the finer touches of fleshly theology. She'd label you a rad Conservative rigid...a dangerous resister of the new church. I'm sure you appreciate her point of view John. BTW I personally don't agree with her...I dislike her intensely.

      Delete

    7. Greally Brendan What grates with we traditional Catholics is those who claim to be traditional calling all the popes antipopes, etc. I have been involved for years with Catholics who have stayed in the Church and fought against modernism, but none of us has engaged in the innuendo about the popes such as Julia du Fresne pasting stuff implying Pope Leo was interferred with in the seminary and is a closet homosexual etc. This is plainly scandal and dividing the Church even further. As you can see there are now divisions among those who have stood for decades against modernism in the Church. We have Cardinal Burke and others who make a stand but they don't behave in the way that these sedevacantists do. It's unacceptable to decent Catholics and what they are doing achieves nothing but just alienates people further. I can understand why Catholics are upset with the way liberalism has taken root in the Church, but just maybe if some, like the SSPX, had stayed and fought from within the liberals wouldn't have gained the foothold they gained. I can well remember when people left the Church and joined the SSPX they were casting slurs on the rest of us while failing to do anything to help, while we wrote, visited bishops and did something positive they swanned along to the Latin Mass and for them everything in the garden was rosy. You only have to read the comments on the online Remnant and Julia du Fresne's blog to see the calibre of people attending SSPX chapels. I have read them saying death to Pope Leo etc. You can stand with that sort of nonsense Brendan but the rest of us will have no truck with them. I know that a good traditional priest now refuses to have the Remnant and calls it a rag. I can't remember you, Brendan, attending the TLM in Wellington either, so obviously you're just a Johnny come lately. Where were you when people were fighting to retain St Mary's of the Angels etc????? Nowhere to be seen.

      Delete
    8. Greally Brendan8 May 2026 at 15:53


      Janet Curran my parents married in that church. I was in the choir for a few years under Fernie. I ran friends of Latin Mass which became Ecclesia De Society. I met with the cardinal at the time many times...help secure an extension of Latin Mass. Also many letters which I still have to sec of state in Vatican ( Monsignor Pearle) . I knew Cardinal Dew when he was made a monsignor.

      Delete

    9. Greally Brendan I was baptised at St Mary of the Angels. It was Una Voce and Mr McSherry who took up a petition at St Mary of the Angels and presented it to Cardinal Williams and the Mass was started at St Mary's Chapel, Guildford Terrace, with Fr Anderson, Fr Bonish and other good priests, under the indult granted by St John Paul II The Great. There was also Catholics United for the Faith in the 1980s and those who were involved with that were also involved in going to the Historic Places Trust and prevented the devastation that was going to occur at St Mary's. Not one SSPX member was involved. They have frankly done nothing through the years. In fact, some who go there if we criticised to them anything that Francis did we were told they weren't allowed to criticise him. So, it's double standards from the SSPX all the way.

      Delete

    10. Greally Brendan There are many in the Church, including the 551 priests in the UK you mention, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Mueller and others (all of whom have been castigated by Julia who put up a photo of Cardinal Mueller with young women implying something of it). That is the problem. We have a group of sedavacantists who write pretty evil stuff and compromise the rest of us who have stood up and continue to oppose modernism/liberalism in the Church while not stooping to their level which gets them absolutely nowhere and undermines the rest of us. They are a tiny group and tiny in mind, come across as crackpots and we get tarred with their brush.

      Delete
    11. Greally Brendan8 May 2026 at 16:35

      I knew Cardinal (John) Dew when he was made a Monsignor ... he was seriously compromised and helped up the ladder by a witches' coven.
      I went to Teachers' Training College in 2000. I attended workshops at the Catholic Centre as part of Catholic Education. The group of women running it believed they had spiritual ties with certain spirits and used them to control certain people ... and their finest work was Monsignor John who they told me would be put in a powerful position as cardinal one day. These women had no Catholic faith...just the worse strain of Liberation Theology and Pachamama worship ( one was from South America while the leader of the coven was from malta).
      When I see Mons John enter he recognises them all as ONE. He cannot recognise their evil and acts like their puppy dog.

      Delete

  11. True heroes of the Faith denoucing the manifest evils that a cowardly and treasonous episcopate have visited upon the Church demanding Catholics finally bury Vatican II - not in some dank corner…by cover of darkness – but in the light of day and in a place which will forever serve as a warning to future generations that God is not mocked with impunity. .

    ReplyDelete

  12. Julia du Fresne You seem to have elevated yourself to become judge and jury of anything and everything - you accept when it suits you, reject when you don’t.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. John Power every Catholic must judge - according to the doctrine of the Church as taught for centuries - what is right and what is wrong, and act accordingly.

      Delete
  13. For a person to hold the Office of the Papacy that person must 1) be a Man, and 2) be within the Catholic Church. Hence the Pope must be Catholic. If a valid Pope ceases to be Catholic, either by manifesting apostasy or heresy, then by his own actions he loses the Office. The public manifestation of heresy or apostasy is their resignation.


    When the Holy See is vacant a man who is outside the Church can not become Pope. Christ holds the Office when it is vacant and will not bestow the authority of the Office on a man who is outside of the Church. It does not matter how many Cardinals vote for that person, as long as they remain outside of the Church they are not in Communion with Christ. Christ will not bestow the Authority of His Church on a man outside of His Church.


    As St Joan of Arc said "Act, and God will Act."
    As ordered by Our Lord Jesus Christ and Our Holy Mother, The Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima, the Faithful need to pray the Rosary daily, Complete the Five Fits Saturday Devotion with the intention of making reparation to the Our Holy Mothers Immaculate Heart, do penance and acts of contrition.
    The Faithful were ordered to do this. Few have and Russia has not (yet) been consecrated and now the Heresy of Modernism has entered the Church and we now have "an Apostasy from the Top." This will only be ended through obeying Christ and Our Holy Mother.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Natividad Pille8 May 2026 at 15:26


    WE CANNOT TOLERATE HERESIES AND THEIR AUTHORS! MAGNIFICAT!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies


    1. Natividad Pille 'Tolerance' is perhaps the most evil fruit of Vatican II.

      Delete