top of page


By His Excellency Bishop Thomas Aquinas, OSB

The cause of the existence of the Resistance is none other than Bishop Fellay with his words and actions. His words downplayed the seriousness of the crisis and the Council. His actions exposed Tradition to the same fate as the Ecclesia Dei communities.

Bishop Fellay did not speak like Archbishop Lefebvre. Archbishop Lefebvre forcefully denounced the errors of the Council as well as those who were the cause of these errors. He practically warned all conciliar popes of their responsibilities. He told John Paul II that if he continued on the path of ecumenism, he would no longer be the good shepherd, and in the drawing regarding Assisi, he said, with images and words, that John Paul II would go to hell if he continued with ecumenism. He told Cardinal Ratzinger that he, Ratzinger, was against the Christianization of society. He denounced the apostasy of conciliar Rome. He exposed errors and their promoters, whoever they were. He defended priests and the faithful from modernist contamination. He faced an invalid but outrageous excommunication. He did not retreat in defending France against the Muslim danger. He protected us against the compromise temptation of Dom Gérard. He was, in short, like the ancient bishops: the defender of Christendom and the basis of Christendom, which is faith. He was the man of theological virtues, sustaining our faith and all virtues.

And Bishop Fellay? Did he continue the action of Archbishop Lefebvre? No. Both in words and deeds, Bishop Fellay distanced himself from Archbishop Lefebvre.

On Religious Liberty, he played down the gravity of what the Council said. He did not tell the popes what Archbishop Lefebvre had said. He did not attack errors like Archbishop Lefebvre. He did not speak of the two churches like Archbishop Lefebvre. He did not clearly distinguish the official Church from the Catholic Church but spoke of a "concrete church," confusing the faithful and even the priests.

What concrete church is this? Do we have to be in this church? We are in the Catholic Church. We recognize the pope but not the conciliar Church, of which Cardinal Benelli spoke. We recognize the pope but not his doctrine or his acts against Tradition. These acts are not Catholic but anti-Catholic.

Under the influence of Bishop Fellay, the 2012 chapter modified the principle stated by the 2006 chapter: no practical agreement without doctrinal agreement. This did not please Bishop Fellay and was changed. With certain conditions, the Society can now make a practical agreement without a doctrinal agreement. It is a loophole. A loophole that could lead the Society down the path of the Ecclesia Dei communities. It has not gone so far, but it lowered its guard, and Rome took advantage of it.

Bishop Fellay suppressed internal resistance within the Society, expelling Bishop Williamson and some priests; then he punished others, like the seven deans who rightly protested against Rome's document regarding marriages. Bishop Fellay disorganized Tradition, distanced himself from Archbishop Lefebvre's line, and led others to do the same. This was the reason for the existence of the Resistance: to resist such distancing.

We want to follow Archbishop Lefebvre in everything, in doctrine and also in practical solutions because, as Aristotle and Saint Thomas teach, the examples of the ancients serve as principles of action. We follow Archbishop Lefebvre in doctrine and action, especially regarding modernist Rome, to be faithful to eternal Rome, the Mistress of truth and holiness.

25th January 2024

Recent Posts

See All


+ PAX THE NAME AND THE THING 24 February 2024 Tradition, Fidelity, Resistance: three words, three things? No, just one. And that is to guard the deposit of the faith. That is the role of the bishops.


By His Excellency Bishop Thomas Aquinas, O.S.B. 17th February 2024 One must hold a very sure doctrine to understand and make others understand the true meaning of the word Tradition, especially during


By His Excellency Bishop Thomas Aquinas, OSB 10th February 2024 Three bishops wrote to their superior about the danger of a purely practical agreement with Rome, and appealed to their founder, Archbis

*Articles published by third parties do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Monastery of Santa Cruz and their publication is for informative purposes only.

The total or partial reproduction of texts, photos, illustrations or any other content on this website by any means is prohibited without the prior authorization of its author/creator or administrator, in accordance with LAW No. 9,610, of February 19, 1998.

bottom of page