SSPX’s Latest Revisionism Betrays +Archbishop Lefebvre

[Stone]

SSPX’s Latest Revisionism Betrays +Archbishop Lefebvre

The Catholic Trumpet [adapted] | December 10, 2024


I. No One Can Serve Two Masters

The SSPX has launched a series of articles claiming to uphold the 1974 Declaration of +Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. They frame him as a heroic defender of Tradition while presenting the SSPX as the faithful guardian of his legacy. But actions speak louder than words.

If Bishop Fellay and his successors claim to follow +Archbishop Lefebvre, why did they sign the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration, which accepts the very errors +Archbishop Lefebvre fought to his dying breath to oppose?

This is not merely a historical issue — it is a question of fidelity to Our Lord Jesus Christ and the salvation of souls. One cannot praise the 1974 Declaration while simultaneously promoting principles condemned within it. No man can serve two masters (Matthew 6:24). No priest can serve the Ark of Tradition while boarding the Titanic of Modernist Rome.

This article will present an irrefutable critique of the SSPX’s revisionist portrayal of +Archbishop Lefebvre, using his own words, his own actions, and his own principles. The time for ambiguity is over. It is time for souls to see clearly.


II. Hope — The 1974 Declaration: The Pillar of Archbishop Lefebvre’s Mission

+Archbishop Lefebvre’s 1974 Declaration is the unchangeable foundation for the SSPX’s mission. It was not a reactionary statement. It was a doctrinal declaration rooted in fidelity to Eternal Rome.

“We hold fast, with all our heart and with all our soul, to Catholic Rome, Guardian of the Catholic Faith and of the traditions necessary to preserve this faith, to Eternal Rome, Mistress of wisdom and truth. We refuse, on the other hand, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it.” — +Archbishop Lefebvre, 1974 Declaration [See here - The Catacombs]

This was a declaration of war on Modernist Rome, and it was clear, rigid, and uncompromising.

Three Key Principles of the 1974 Declaration

1. No Submission to Modernist Rome — No obedience can be given to a Rome that promotes neo-modernism.

2. No Acceptance of Vatican II — It is not enough to reject “abuses” of Vatican II; the Council itself must be rejected.

3. No Compromise with the New Code of Canon Law — The 1983 Code is infected with the principles of Vatican II, as +Archbishop Lefebvre repeatedly taught.

These three principles form the foundation of the SSPX’s mission. If these principles are violated, the SSPX becomes a different organization altogether.


III. The SSPX’s Modernist Drift and the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration

The SSPX’s new series on +Archbishop Lefebvre boldly claims to uphold his 1974 Declaration. But their actions tell another story. The clearest evidence of this contradiction is the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration signed by Bishop Bernard Fellay [See here - The Catacombs].

This document enshrines the very principles that +Archbishop Lefebvre condemned. Let us expose these betrayals point by point.


Betrayal #1: Submission to the New Code of Canon Law

“We promise to respect the common discipline of the Church and the ecclesiastical laws, especially those which are contained in the Code of Canon Law promulgated by John-Paul II (1983) and in the Code of Canon Law of the Oriental Churches promulgated by the same pontiff (1990), without prejudice to the discipline of the Society of Saint Pius X, by a special law.” — 2012 Doctrinal Declaration, III.8

Why This Is a Betrayal

+Archbishop Lefebvre was clear in his opposition to the 1983 Code of Canon Law. He warned that it was filled with the errors of ecumenism and personalism.

“The 1983 Code of Canon Law is imbued with ecumenism and personalism.” — +Archbishop Lefebvre, 1983

Here are just two of the major errors of this Code:

• Canon 844: Holy Communion for non-Catholics.

• Canon 1095: Marriage annulments on psychological grounds.

These are not merely “disciplines.” They are symptoms of the new ecclesiology of Vatican II. To “respect” this Code is to submit to its authority, as “respect” implies deference, compliance, and observance of its principles. Bishop Fellay bound the SSPX to a legal framework infected with the principles of Vatican II.


Betrayal #2: The Hermeneutic of Continuity

“The entire tradition of Catholic Faith must be the criterion and guide in understanding the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, which, in turn, enlightens—in other words, deepens and subsequently makes explicit—certain aspects of the life and doctrine of the Church implicitly present within itself or not yet conceptually formulated.” — 2012 Doctrinal Declaration, III.4

Why This Is a Betrayal

This statement adopts the language of Pope Benedict XVI’s “hermeneutic of continuity”, which proposes that Vatican II “deepened” or “enlightened” Church doctrine. This is the exact logic that +Archbishop Lefebvre rejected.

“It is not we who judge the Church; it is the Church that judges the Council.” — +Archbishop Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him

The “hermeneutic of continuity” claims that Vatican II was not a rupture but a development of Tradition. This is false. This doctrine comes from Modernist theology and has been condemned by the Church.


IV. Return to the Ark of Our Lady and Eternal Rome

The betrayal of Bishop Fellay and the new SSPX hierarchy does not mean the faithful are lost. The Ark is still afloat. +Archbishop Lefebvre’s mission has not failed. It has simply been abandoned by the new SSPX. But you can remain faithful.

What Must We Do?

1. Return to the 1974 Declaration — Do not follow modernist Rome.

2. Reject the 2012 Doctrinal Declaration — It must be publicly rejected by anyone claiming to follow +Archbishop Lefebvre.

3. Cling to Our Lady’s Ark — Our Lady is calling her faithful to stay with Eternal Rome, not modernist Rome.

“They remain always liberal… and that is why we must not rejoin them.” — +Archbishop Lefebvre


V. Do Not Abandon The Ark

+Archbishop Lefebvre’s battle is your battle. It is a battle for souls, for the Church, and for Eternal Rome. The SSPX’s attempt to reframe his legacy must be confronted with uncompromising fidelity to Our Lady.

Which side will you stand on? The Ark of Eternal Rome or the sinking Titanic of Modernist Rome?

“Do not abandon the Ark to board the Titanic.”

The Titanic of Modernist Rome is sinking. Just as the passengers of the Titanic were told, “All is well,” so too are SSPX faithful being lulled into complacency by false assurances from those who no longer fight for Tradition.

Do not abandon the Ark to board the Titanic. Stay on the Ark of Our Lady.

Do not follow those who promise security on a ship destined to sink.

“They remain always liberal… and that is why we must not rejoin them.” — +Archbishop Lefebvre

The Ark of Our Lady is secure. Do not be deceived. Do not abandon it.

Stay with the Immaculate Heart of Mary, for in the end, her Immaculate Heart will triumph.



-The ☩ Trumpet