Articles Archive

Why the League of Christ the King found it necessary to sever official ties with the SSPX MC

Special Bulletin – Supplement to the Spring 2016 Issue (#9) of Oportet Christum Regnare


And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every

brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received from us” (II Thess.3:6).

Dear Friends of the Catholic Resistance:

In the wake of the recent turn of events in the Kentucky-based Marian Corps (SSPX-MC), which resulted in the tragic defection of some clergy and troops from the norms of Traditional Catholic teaching and from the true Resistance, let us not lose heart. There is good news along with the bad.

First the bad: Since last we wrote, the League of Christ the King and its official quarterly Oportet Christum Regnare have, sadly but unavoidably, severed official ties with the Marian Corps headed by Father Joseph Pfeiffer, which we were once proud to be affiliated with, and even helped bolster and solidify their ranks. The decision to disassociate the League from the SSPX-Marian Corps was necessary but difficult all the same, as some of the MC priests are not only long-time personal friends, but were priests of exceptional fervor and zeal, and more, some were among that very small number of counter-revolutionary clergy who were one mind with the Church Militant – a rarity among priests in general and traditional priests as well, most of whom, even if less than their Novus Ordo counterparts, are still more liberal than orthodox and more mediocre than militant. How does one measure the loss of such men consecrated and so passionately devoted to the service of God and the Church – especially a Father David Hewko, considered by many to be the best of the best? And yet there’s always the possibility that the loss need not be a permanent one. Enough prayers and sacrifices can deliver these MC priests and faithful from their own impetuous misjudgments, the gravity of which is more damaging than they apparently realize. We therefore beg your prayers on their behalf, while sincerely hoping that, between the League and the Marian Corps, and between the Marian Corps and the three Resistance Bishops, the estrangement will be short-lived, and that the Resistance partisans will once again come together unified and strong as one. As much as we’d like to see this happen, however, and as hard as we shall strive for it, the ultimate decision is theirs, not ours. For, after all is said and done, they are the ones that have drifted from the norms of Traditional Church thinking, not Bishop Williamson, not Father Chazal, and not the League – and this is the truth, notwithstanding the barrage of disinformation and falsehood to the contrary.

How can I be so certain about this – me, a simple soldier of Christ and nothing more, absolutely no theologian, no scholar, no expert on anything – just an ordinary lay Catholic faithfully determined to keep soldiering for Christ, no matter the cost or how heavy the cross? You must read this letter in full as well as the three articles recommended, to really grasp the whole picture and to avoid the lethal snares of the contrary arguments. To start off with I will give you but one reason for my unshaken certainty in this regard: Personally speaking, my active involvement in the Traditional Catholic movement goes back 47 years, to 1969. Heavily engaged in Catholic Action in the immediate aftermath of the Vatican II revolution and ever since, myself and other active lay apostles were in constant contact with priests and laity of the Novus Ordo Church and over the years assisted very many laity in finding their way out of the darkness of Conciliarism and into the light of Traditional Catholicism – to the Traditional Catholic Mass and Church. During this stormy period literally hundreds of times a litany of related questions arose focusing mostly on the New Mass, and answers were sought from and provided by the most learned and trustworthy Traditional priests. Over and over we heard the same questions from the onset of the New Mass onwards, and over and over we were given the same answers by the Traditional clergy that we consulted: Was this New Mass heretical? Yes! Was it a sacrilege? Yes! Was it valid? Possibly, possibly not, in which case the doubtfulness was another reason for Catholics to keep their distance from it. What about our Sunday obligation? We cannot keep holy the Lord’s Day by participating in a profane, prostituted liturgy which is centered on man not God. Do we listen to those in authority or to our conscience? Our conscience, but it must be properly formed according to the Doctrine of Christ and Christian morals. By disobeying our superiors are we disobeying God? We are bound to disobey superiors who order us to embrace error or commit sin. God is always to be obeyed before men, even before legitimate authorities. Should we remain in the parish? Leave the parish? Stay and protest? Stay and suffer in silence? Withhold financial support? Seek out a Traditional Latin Mass? Place ourselves and our families under the care of one of the few scattered “independent” Traditional priests? You know the answers to these questions, lest you would not be Traditional Catholics. How about this one: Is there ever any justification for attending/participating in a New Mass? A Traditional Catholic may passively attend the New Mass on the occasions of a wedding or funeral but never actively participate in it. A Conciliar Catholic, ignorant of the evils of the New Mass, may conditionally participate if he/she honestly thinks they are doing good and pleasing God. This is not to say we approve or promote the New Mass (NEVER!), but that it may be tolerated under certain circumstances to avoid a greater evil. Like it or not, it’s what Catholic Theology teaches. And we are not at liberty to hold a contrary view.

Good Catholics have been traumatized by such harrowing questions, doubts, confusions since Vatican II. If you don’t believe that there are good Catholics yet inside the Conciliar Church , you need to come out of your cocoon or step down from your ivory tower and rejoin the human race. It is vanity to contend this point. Yet this is where the misunderstanding and upset over Bishop Williamson’s comments entered the picture – he was not addressing a Traditional Catholic secure in the knowledge of his faith, but a Novus Ordo Catholic clearly confused and distressed, which makes all the difference in the world. We’ll come back to that momentarily. The point I am attempting to make here is that, during all those years since the Council, never was there a Traditional priest – not one single Traditional priest in 47 years (other than a few unhinged extremists whose counsel we promptly rejected) – that did not uphold and exposit the exact same position on the New Mass that Bishop Williamson maintains and expounds to this very day. It was the only Catholic position since the horrendous New Mass was diabolically foisted upon the Church. It is the only Catholic position today, behind which stands the infallible teaching of the Council of Trent and which Archbishop Lefebvre and the old Society of St. Pius X always held fast to. Doctrine, Theology and the Faith do not and can not change with time or circumstances or for expedience’ sake (“evolution of doctrine” is a diabolical farce!), but are forever precisely what the Church, the Scriptures, the Popes and Sacred Tradition have authoritatively declared and faithfully passed on to us intact. On this, as on all things pertaining to religion, the Church has spoken. The matter is therefore settled. End of story.

But we’re getting ahead of ourselves. Let’s rewind a bit and take up where we left off. Formally cutting ties with the SSPX-MC will come as welcome news to the more than two dozen League members and supporters who’ve been vocal about wanting to see this happen for a while (some for as long as 2 years), having become disheartened by the unorthodox thinking and divisive actions of certain priests out of Boston, Kentucky. On the other hand it may surprise and even upset some friends hearing it for the first time who perhaps never fully comprehended that the fight for Catholic Tradition allows no compromise whatsoever on “faith or morals.” The question immediately arises: Where exactly has the MC compromised on faith, on doctrine, or on its interpretation and application? In a word it has fallen to the extreme, which is never a good thing. The Church uses the term rigorism. The KY group has in effect declared war on Bishop Richard Williamson, aided and feverishly encouraged by Greg Taylor, lay editor of The Recusant published from the UK, squarely because it has failed to take into account the fact, among others, that moral theology can never be excluded from its practical function, that is, theology in practice; or put another way, an objective principle is never without its subjective application. Only in the confused, untrained or delusional mind would these distinctions appear contradictory, incompatible, or of no utility. Without these distinctions, without allowing extenuating circumstances to enter the equation which, while never negating the law, allows for the letter of the law to yield to the spirit, the spirit being of a superior stature and imperative (“…not in the letter, but in the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life” – 2 Cor. 3:6); without this rightful perspective and its prudential contingencies, the sin and doctrinal corruption of rigorism sets in – and, as we’ve been seeing with the Marian Corps and The Recusant, it leads to a multiplicity of compounding transgressions against the faith, directly or indirectly, that is against one or more of its doctrines or their bearing and utilization. One compromise with error leads to another, and another, and another…until, analogously, the clueless proverbial frog is boiled alive as the heat is so gradually turned up that he fails to realize what’s taking place – until it’s too late!

Rigorism is a condemned moral system defined as a severe, harsh or oppressive strictness, inflexibility and extremism. The position maintained by the KY Marian Corps and Recusant (MC/R) unfortunately has become very rigorist, and grossly uncharitable to boot, specifically pertaining to finding fault with Bishop Williamson in the most malicious manner, and espousing far-fetched thinking on the New Mass and Conciliar Church, permitting no factor or circumstance, no matter how morally compelling, to justify a certain occasional and conditional exception to the rule. The rigorist position has always come under the strict ban of the Church, for one reason because it pits sanctifying grace against legitimate human liberty, instead of the two working in concert for the good of the soul and in the interest of Catholic Truth; for another reason it makes impossible, or at least exceedingly difficult, the simple daily practice of the Catholic religion without which man cannot be saved. Whereas God never expects man to do the impossible, the rigorist presumes to tell him, in effect, that he must – or else! The rigorist not only lacks meekness, prudence, hope, and a sense of the Catholic faith which is always orthodox, which means always fixed and balanced, he misrepresents the faith with a heavy-handed severity.

A classic example of the Church’s strong, consistent and binding denunciation of rigorism is found in her teaching on the doctrine “no salvation outside the Catholic Church,” which certain rigorists take to the extreme, denying baptism of desire, for example. The Church many times condemned the false rigorist interpretation of this doctrine (Popes Innocent II, Pius IX, and Pius XII. The Holy Office under Pius XII reiterated the condemnation in 1949). The same condemnation may be applied to the false interpretation fiercely maintained by the sedevacantists on the question of the Pope and, more to the point, by the SSPX-Marian Corps and Recusant on the New Mass and the Conciliar Church, the consequences of which are extremely grave and potentially injurious to innumerable souls.

As the great Garrigou-Lagrange said, the Church is intolerant in principle because she believes, but tolerant in practice because she loves. That’s a profound statement which directly applies to the present problem with the Marian Corps and The Recusant, who doubtlessly accept the former but do not adhere to the latter – at least not in its actual application. The Catholic Faith is perfectly balanced between doctrine on the one hand and its charitable application on the other. Bishop Williamson exemplifies this holy balance, whereas his most outspoken enemies clearly do not.

Certainly no one is saying that the New Rite of Mass and the Conciliar are not evil in a very real certain sense, least of all Bishop Williamson. They definitely are, and it’s completely dishonest and deceiving of the bishop’s detractors to make such an outrageous claim against him. Shame on all those that have bitten into that untruth, and God help those that perpetuate it knowingly unto the defamation of the good bishop’s good name. The real question has to do with whether or not it’s at all possible for a Catholic, acting in good conscience and out of a no-fault ignorance, to receive graces at this New Rite of Mass and in the Conciliar Church – even if not through or by them, which would be impossible. It must be understood that the question is never directed at Traditional Catholics, who, given the grace of knowing the evils of the New Mass, would be forbidden to have anything to do with it, other than passive, non-participatory attendance at a wedding or funeral as noted earlier, but it is directed at Conciliar Catholics who do not know any better, assumingly out of a blameless ignorance (which certainly does not apply to every or perhaps not even most Conciliarists, for whose ignorance, born of lethargy, lukewarmness or any other type sinful negligence and omission, will make them accountable). Remember that Bishop Williamson was speaking not to a Traditional but Novus Ordo Catholic in giving his answer. In this context, then, how is the MC/R position rigorist and hence clearly not Catholic? Four ways, as we see it, each related to their failure to observe and apply the principles explained above:

First, it fails to distinguish between rite and sacrament. It’s not enough and much too simplistic to say “the New Mass is evil and therefore, under no circumstance can it give grace or should any Catholic attend.” As a rule, yes, keep far away from the New Mass, but as we said above the Church allows for certain conditional exceptions. If the Church says yes, who are we to say no? In understanding this, we must realize, again, that there are distinctions that intelligent and rational men must make. The new rite is a prostituted and irreverent liturgical formula and therefore, for this and other reasons, is intrinsically evil. As for the sacrament, it may or may not be valid in a given New Mass, but if valid, it most certainly may impart grace to the soul properly disposed before God, not due to the rite, which is profane, subversive and very displeasing to God, but rather by virtue of the holy sacrament of the altar itself, whose divine power remains infinitely beyond the corruption of that evil rite. Let us not forget that Catholicism, even though it possesses a certain human element (membership, clergy and hierarchy, for example), is nonetheless essentially and principally a supernatural not human institution. The Marian Corps/Recusant say no to this position concerning rite and sacrament, dismissing the fact that it’s been made explicitly clear by the Council of Trent in its pronouncements on the sacraments and which has been consistently upheld by Archbishop Lefebvre and the old SSPX. Upholding Trent and opposing the MC/R error, Bishop Williamson, Father Chazal, the LKC and the true Resistance stand with Tradition, as we all must.

Second, by such rigorism the MC/R would choke the spiritual and eternal life out of all those poor souls who attend the New Mass and still belong to the Conciliar Church, no matter how inculpable their ignorance of Tradition may be or how devout and virtuous they themselves may otherwise be. Rigorism directed at those New Mass/Novus Ordo attendees does not allow for blameless ignorance of the faith, nor for that “certain desire and wish to do what God wills” among those millions who are outside the visible bond of the Traditional Catholic Church. It stands vehemently opposed to what Bl. Pius IX has written of those in a state of invincible ignorance, namely, that they “are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace” (Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, on false doctrines, 1863). Of such theological/moral/pastoral questions, Bishop Williamson has a Traditional bishop’s knowledge and understanding; Father Pfeiffer and Greg Taylor evidently do not. Rigorists are liberals inasmuch as they prefer their private opinion to Magisterial teaching. When the two are at odds, they invariably choose opinion. The logical conclusion of this extreme way of thinking is that only the traditional Catholic can save his soul and that God’s grace, ostensibly deficient in its supernatural efficacy, lacks the power to enter the abode or places of worship of non-traditionalists. Such a notion, besides being liberal, silly, presumptuously false and a blasphemy besides, is egotistical as well (implying that we traditionalists consider ourselves far superior to every one else outside the fold). Such a conclusion would also make of the Lord of mercy a most cruel and unjust God for denying His grace to the soul who is ignorant through no fault of his own, and in very great need of it!

Third, by their very aggressive rigorism (aggressively condemning Bishop Williamson for not advocating the false rigorist viewpoint) the MC/R partisans are misrepresenting, splitting and thus undermining (not to mention scandalizing) the same Resistance they once helped rally and fortify.

And fourth, they are hurting themselves more than the rest of the Resistance who have not succumbed to their oppressively stringent ideas, for they’ve now even cut themselves and their faithful off from the last-standing solidly orthodox Catholic Bishops. Such an act, direful beyond measure and if they persist unrepentant of it, may likely put the American Marian Corps in the immediate spiritual danger of mutating into a non-Catholic sect. I’m not saying this is so, but likely if they continue on their present course of wrong thinking and action. Yes, dear friends, their defection from Catholic Teaching is that serious! Ideas have consequences. False ideas have harmful consequences. That’s just one of the facts of life. One wrong step concerning faith or morals on the dangerously narrow and high-ridge of life can easily result in such a fatal plunge. It’s a twofold plunge to the abyss: (1) Catholics cannot dismiss the subjective application of an objective principle any more than they can dismiss the doctrine itself. And (2) Catholics cannot cut themselves off from the Episcopacy any more than they can from the Papacy without suffering a fateful outcome.

Bad news indeed, but it leads us directly to some good news.

God would not allow the erroneous thinking of the US Marian Corps/Recusant alliance to prevail unexposed and unchallenged, regardless how convincing their arguments seem on the surface, or how many unvigilant souls they may have initially beguiled and led astray. One of the best articles making this fact glaringly obvious while eloquently elaborating on the points only briefly covered above was authored by Mr. Sean Johnson and is titled “A Catechetical Refutation Regarding Certain Objections Made to Bishop Williamson’s Comments on the Novus Ordo.” The article, which cannot be refuted owing to its theological soundness, was posted on the pro-Resistance website,, and will soon be reprinted in booklet form by the League, with the author’s kind permission. Subscribers to Oportet Christum Regnare will be notified upon availability.

Every Resistance Catholic (i.e. every true Catholic) who sincerely seeks the truth about the latest controversy surrounding the falsehoods generated by the US Marian Corps and The Recusant against Bishop Williamson, and against the teaching of Trent on the sacraments and Archbishop Lefebvre on the New Mass, ought to give Sean Johnson’s article an immediate reading. It is meticulously researched, intelligently presented and, as we said, doctrinally irrefutable. We very highly recommend it. And we very strongly urge giving it a broad distribution as a major counterattack against the falsehoods being spread about by the MC/R, which cannot be other than exceedingly offensive to God, Who is not just All-Holy but Truth Itself.

More good news: A second article was written by newly consecrated Bishop Thomas Aquinas, titled “In Defense of Bishop Williamson,” which we’ve re-titled “Eucharisitic Miracles in the Novus Ordo?” and incorporated into the current issue of our magazine. As the revised title indicates, it covers the question of the possibility of miracles performed in Conciliar churches (Sean Johnson’s article also does a great job addressing the same issue). Bishop Williamson says yes to the possibility, the rigorists say no way, and the article explains why the bishop is correct and his adversaries are once again wrong. It also makes clear that by such divine manifestations in a Novus Ordo church God would not be sanctioning heresy or profane and irreverent worship, which, needless to say, is not possible, but rather He would be adding further proof of the veracity of a particular doctrine, in the case of Eucharistic miracles He would be re-affirming, for example, Transubstantiation, the Real Presence and the Sacrificial nature not of the Novus Ordo Missae (New Mass) which not only does not uphold these truths but greatly negates them in the minds of the people, but of the Traditional Mass in the Tridentine Latin rite, which presents them in the most sublime and glorious manner. The bishop’s article is another must read, this one also available online at the Archbishop Lefebvre Forum, And a third article, “The Resistance Need Not Be a House Divided,” this one by the League Chaplain, Father Chazal, who adds yet another voice of reason and sound theology in explicating why he will continue siding with Bishop Williamson and cannot endorse the reckless and untruthful claims of Father Joe Pfeiffer and Greg Taylor. This writing is also found in the current issue of Oportet Christum Regnare (#9).

These articles are important for all Traditional Catholics, not only those of the SSPX Resistance, because what they cover goes directly to the heart of the fight for Catholic Faith and Tradition. As always, we urge everyone reading this insert to pass these three articles around, as well as every issue of our magazine, as widely as your means and circumstances permit.

Though we may often overlook it, there’s a reason why God gives us bishops, and that reason is very much part of the Divine Plan. A bishop has graces of state that ordinary pastors, clergy and laity do not possess, the holier, more orthodox and more counterrevolutionary the bishop, the more graces he will possess and be able to channel to the rest of us for the rebuilding of the Church devastated by crisis. As it was with Archbishop Lefebvre, so it is with Bishop Williamson. The problem is that traditional Catholics have become so accustomed to criticizing the many bad superiors that they are all too prone to criticize – and even condemn – the few good ones. This does not apply to Bishop Fellay who has so manifestly betrayed Christ, Catholic Tradition, the Mystical Body, his own SSPX clergy and unsuspecting faithful, but it certainly applies to Bishop Williamson who has never betrayed them. We are not saying His Excellency is above all criticism, only above the hateful, venomous and unfounded criticisms of the Marian Corps/Recusant consortium.

It is The Recusant publication that is presently fueling the flames of detraction and defection from right thinking, right conduct and the right course of action. The really tragic thing is that The Recusant used to be a superb journal, so often praised by me personally as the finest of the English-speaking pro-Resistance voices, but which has since become, as one League member observed with a heavy heart, “NO LONGER WORTHY TO CALL ITSELF CATHOLIC” (Emphasis his)!

The revolt of the MC/R against Bishop Williamson is all too reminiscent of the revolt of the “Nine” (Frs. Sanborn, Cekada, Kelly, Dolan, etc.) against Archbishop Lefebvre at the time his Priestly Society was gaining a foothold in North America in the early 1970s, neither revolt theologically, canonically or morally vindicated. Interesting enough, though, the “Nine” falsely charged the archbishop with wavering on the New Mass exactly as the MC/R is presently and just as falsely charging Bishop Williamson. Catholic clergy and laity such as these, too easily roused to a vain and misdirected resistance by the whisperings or clamorings of unprincipled spiritual demagogues, should be concerned that, failing to imitate the humble Savior and consequently taking up an unrighteous cause, they could easily imitate the perfidious Pharisees, and in fact are heading in that very direction inasmuch as (a) they are now habitually finding fault in others while overlooking their own far greater faults; (b) they obsess over the letter while giving hardly any consideration to the spirit of the law; (c) they therefore misuse the authority God has given them and (d) are consequently leading into error and sin the very people and families that put their trust in them and for whose spiritual welfare they are accountable before God. We see this happening before our eyes, and in the process the SSPX-Marian Corps is becoming unglued from the top down much the same as the neo-SSPX – the one stricken with liberalism on the left, the other with rigorism on the right, and both having become casualties of an extremist mindset unbecoming a Catholic who is always militant but never extreme, always a combatant but never without charity.

Equally disturbing, these Marian Corps rigorists might similarly be likened to the ungrateful Jews recounted in the Book of Numbers who were severely punished for their constant murmuring against the Lord and against His bishops. “…There arose a murmuring of the people against the Lord… And the Lord heard it and He was angry (Numbers 11:1). And the wrath of the Lord was exceedingly enkindled…” (Numbers 11:10). In the end only two out of six-hundred thousand originally liberated Jews saw the Promised Land, due to their ingratitude and constant murmuring, even as the Lord had delivered them from the bondage of Egypt. Are we not hearing a very similar constant murmuring from the US Marian Corps and The Recusant, even as the Lord has delivered them from the bondage of the Conciliar Church and Conciliar SSPX? The parallels are striking.

How much it hurts to be speaking this way about good souls gone wrong, about zealous apostles now committed to a wrongful cause, but charity compels us to admonish our fathers and brothers going astray even as we lament the multiplicity and severity of our own sins. Still, the defense of Catholic Truth, the exercise of charity and the works of mercy are required of us, more so the greater and more urgent the needs of our neighbor. So, in charity, in justice, and in brotherly love we give fair warning to Recusant editor Greg Taylor that he has been using his considerable writing and analytical skills to do not God but the Devil’s work, spreading falsehood, dissension and disunity and instigating ill-will. And the KY Marian Corps priests that are actually still recommending his publication which thrives on disinformation and proliferates in scandal-mongering – as distressing as this is considering how good these priests used to be – are likely to find themselves in even greater danger of promoting what has become a conspicuously wicked work. Harsh words, I know, and it pains me to be putting them to print even after having prayed many rosaries and received the go-ahead from a spiritual advisor before releasing this bulletin. My priest advisor corroborated that a public betrayal of such magnitude by priests and lay apostles to whom much have been given, necessitates “the most charitable but VERY STRONGEST public reprimand, lest they never become jarred from their horrible misdeeds that are fomenting so much confusion and disorder. How does one sugar-coat such brazen wrongfulness as to portray Bishop Williamson – a great man of Godas a vile traitor? It is diabolical!” May the God of mercy not judge Bishop Williamson’s enemies as harshly as they judge him. As one friend put it, “if what Bishop Williamson said about the New Mass was scandalous [which it certainly was not except in the confused minds of the ignorant or the twisted minds of the ill-intentioned; nevertheless], the way His Excellency has been treated by clergy and people of the Resistance was a thousand times more scandalous!” WOE TO YOU [THAT]…TAKE AWAY THE JUSTICE OF THE JUST MAN (Isaias 5:23). WOE TO YOU THAT CALL EVIL GOOD AND GOOD EVIL (Isaias 5:20).

Canon Law sets before clerics such duties of state as holiness of life (c. 124), exercises of piety (c. 125) and obedience to superiors (cc. 127, 128) which canons require, among other things, showing reverence towards their bishops (Bouscaren and Ellis, Canon Law: A Text and Commentary, 1946). Have any of you actually read any of the more recent issues of The Recusant, which the US Marian Corps priests uncritically and most alarmingly promote? If any one word might describe this

publication’s bitter and relentless attacks against Bishop Williamson it is irreverent – uncharitable to the extreme, calumnious to be exact. The Holy Redeemer teaches: blessed are the meek, the merciful, the peacemakers, those that hunger for justice – but blessed not are the proud or the self-righteous, nor those that, failing to mortify their tongue (their pen, their periodicals, and the rash and untruthful words spoken from the pulpit), spread falsehood, gossip, rumors, innuendo, calumny and discord among the brethren. Who can deny that this indeed is a wicked work, and certainly not of God? An yet Father Pfeiffer and Greg Taylor have convinced themselves that they are on the moral high ground doing good. It’s madness! And once more, part of the Diabolical Disorientation of these Darkest of Days.

Thank God the greater number of Resistance priests and people never lost the spirit of charity, nor were under any illusions about what this fight was all about, and are therefore in complete agreement with the decision to detach ourselves from the Kentucky based Marian Corps (as mentioned earlier, two dozen-plus very concerned League members were urging us to do so for nearly 2 years – but we felt compelled to give the MC priests the benefit of the doubt, which benefit, it turns out, the MC/R denied Bishop Williamson); the same majority of Resistance laity are now standing with us and with Bishop Williamson and Father Chazal against the few who’ve succumbed to this all-too Pharisaic extremism.

It’s most unfortunate that it has come to this, but until such time as the Marian Corps and The Recusant publicly repent of their scandalous false witness against Bishop Williamson, and publicly recant their wrongful thinking on the doctrines and pastoral/prudential conclusions pertaining to the New Mass and Conciliar Church, and make public restitution for the great harm their bizarre un-traditional position has inflicted on souls, on the Resistance and on the Church, the League and its quarterly magazine shall remain detached from them, while filially attached to Bishops Williamson, Faure and Aquinas, and still under the chaplaincy of good Father Chazal of the Marian Corps-SPX, as we have been since the League’s 2013 reactivation. We will not just continue praying for Frs. Joe Pfeiffer and David Hewko of the SSPX Marian Corps, and the Recusant editor Greg Taylor, but will let them know that, in all earnestness, we would happily welcome them back into the fold with open arms, if and when they cast aside their false notions and their hardness of heart to rejoin Bishops Williamson, Faure and Aquinas and Father Chazal, and once again labor side-by-side in the true Resistance – the fight against Liberalism and the Modern Revolution, and the Apostasy both inside and outside the Church. To facilitate such a desired reunion, we ask that you join us in prayer, and in getting this Open Letter and the 3 articles mentioned herein into the hands of every SSPX-MC faithful you know. It’s a vital work of charity because their ignorance is nothing short of spiritually debilitating and counterproductive.

Enough said. I think we’ve made our point.

We close with a final reflection on the common mission we’ve been called to: through many long hard years of crisis and upheaval, the League has held fast as Traditional Catholicism’s only nationwide Catholic Action men’s auxiliary, defending the Faith, championing the Rights of God, supporting the good bishops and priests, making known the Fatima formula for world peace, rebuilding both the Church and City of God, forming real soldiers of Christ and manning the defenses of our country while exposing and resisting the manifold works of Satan. We shall continue and escalate this holy and urgent work for Christ our King and Mary our Queen so long as God continues giving us the strength and good men continue their active and financial support. We thank you for your continuing generous assistance to this apostolate, whose importance in these Dark Days cannot be over-stated.

Hugh Akins, 6/14/16

Posted by Hugh Akins

National Director, Catholic Action Resource Center

Founding President, League of Christ the King

Editor/Publisher, Oportet Christum Regnare

Active supporter of the SSPX Resistance

Post Office Box 678047 + Orlando, Florida 32867 USA