Bishop Fellay, in the name of all Catholic Tradition, already issued an excellent and urgent appeal to the Holy Father before the Synod. Now, with the Synod behind us - confusion, omission and neglect prevalent during it - and the onus finally on the Holy Father to fulfil his divine mandate to "confirm the brethren" (cf. St. Luke 22:32), Bishop Fellay once more, simply and firmly, proves to be an effective witness of Tradition before the Roman authorities like Archbishop Lefebvre before him, by publicly reminding the Pope to fulfill the duties of his office.

What is the Resistance, in comparison, doing to try and limit the impact of the crisis in the Church?

http://sspx.org/en/declaration-concerning-synod-family

The Final Report of the second session of the Synod on the Family, published on October 24, 2015, far from showing a consensus of the Synod Fathers, is the expression of a compromise between profoundly divergent positions. Of course we can read in it some doctrinal reminders about marriage and the Catholic family, but we note also some regrettable ambiguities and omissions, and most importantly several breaches opened up in discipline in the name of a relativistic pastoral “mercy”.  The general impression that this docuмent gives is of confusion, which will not fail to be exploited in a sense contrary to the constant teaching of the Church ...

As we already wrote in our Petition to the Holy Father: “Our uneasiness is caused by something that Saint Pius X condemned in his Encyclical Pascendi:  an alignment of dogma with supposed contemporary demands. Pius X and you, Holy Father, received the fullness of the authority to teach, sanctify and govern in obedience to Christ, who is the Head and the Shepherd of the flock in every age and in every place, whose faithful vicar the pope should be on this earth. The object of a dogmatic condemnation could not possibly become, with the passage of time, an authorized pastoral practice” ...

One cannot emancipate oneself from Gospel teaching in the name of a subjectivist pastoral approach which, while recalling it in general, would abolish in on a case-by-case basis. One cannot grant to the bishops the faculty of suspending the law of the indissolubility of marriage ad casum, without running the risk of weakening the teaching of the Gospel and of fragmenting the authority of the Church. For, in this erroneous view, what is affirmed doctrinally could be denied pastorally, and what is forbidden de jure could be authorized de facto.

In this utter confusion it is now up to the pope—in keeping with his responsibility, and within the limits set on him by Christ—to restate clearly and firmly the Catholic truth quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus,[8] and to keep this universal truth from being contradicted in practice locally.

One might point out that Bishop Fellay does not speak for all of Tradition in any sense.

He is not even speaking for the whole of his own Lefebvrerian sect.

If it is a stronger declaration that the Resistance wants, why hasn't one been forthcoming from your priests? Could it be you are too busy in internal politics to care much for the needs of the wider Church? You criticize the Society so much, I think you can take a bit of criticism yourself in the right spirit. And as for Archbishop Lefebvre, his statements in the immediate aftermath of Vatican II are very much along the same lines as Bishop Fellay,

Quote

The destruction of the Church is advancing at a rapid pace. By giving an exaggerated authority to the episcopal conferences, the Sovereign Pontiff has rendered himself powerless. What painful lessons in one single year! Yet the Successor of Peter and he alone can save the Church.

Let the Holy Father surround himself with strong defenders of the faith: let him appoint them to the important dioceses. Let him by docuмents of outstanding importance proclaim the truth, search out error without fear of contradictions, without fear of schisms, without fear of calling in question the pastoral dispositions of the Council.

Let the Holy Father deign: to encourage the bishops to correct faith and morals, each individually in his respective diocese as it behooves every good pastor to uphold the courageous bishops, to urge them to reform their seminaries and to restore them to the study of St. Thomas; to encourage Superiors General to maintain in novitiates and communities the fundamental principles of all Christian asceticism, and above all, obedience; to encourage the development of Catholic schools, a press informed by sound doctrine, associations of Christian families; and finally, to rebuke the instigators of errors and reduce them to silence. The Wednesday allocutions cannot replace encyclicals, decrees and letters to the bishops.

Doubtless I am reckless in expressing myself in this manner! But it is with ardent love that I compose these lines, love of God's glory, love of Jesus, love of Mary, of the Church, of the Successor of Peter, Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ.

http://archives.sspx.org/archbishop_lefebvre/arch_lefebvre_response_card_ottaviani_post_council.htm

Wake up!  This is 2015, not the immediate aftermath of the council.

The accordistas love to cherry-pick quotes from the Archbishop from the 1970's before it became apparent how deep the crisis was.

Just listen to the Archbishop's later talks after 1988. He was much more pessimistic about Rome.

And to answer your question, Bishop Williamson has already spoken about the Synod. So much for doing nothing. And far from doing nothing, he and resisting priests all around the world are helping us laymen to see the truth and keep the Faith during this latest chapter of the Crisis in the Church. That's doing plenty!

As for Rome, let the dead bury their dead.

You can plunge your head back into the sand now, or put your pacifier back in your mouth, or whatever it is that makes you happy.

If you don't like the Resistance, I really don't know what you're doing here.

Quote from: JPM

Quote from: richard

The Archbishop would have written that Rome has lost the faith and not to pay any attention to what the synod has to say,stay away.To state that Bp.Fellay's declaration is in the spirit of the ArchBishop is laughable,it is more like tepid dishwater.

More tepid dishwater from ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE

Quote

Most Holy Father,
Since your accession to the Pontificate I have always nourished the hope that the total devotion of my Society and my person to Holy Mother Church would be recognised and that we should be allowed to work freely and in submission to the Church for the salvation of souls, by an increase in the numbers of holy priests.

Your wish for a solution to be found, your struggle against errors spread by theologians whose spirit is tainted with Modernism, such as Hans Kung, Schillebeeckx, Pohier; your efforts to restore normality to Holland; your latest encyclical recalling the principles which are the foundation of the Sacrifice of the Eucharist, all these have been so many occasions to hope for such a solution, since we concur entirely with your thinking and wishes in all these fields.

Furthermore, the principal aim of the Society of St. Pius being the formation of true priests of the Roman Catholic Church, we rejoiced every time that Your Holiness called to mind the principles which should govern the training of priests and which are precisely those that have been used in our seminaries since their foundation.

It could be thought, reading the latest docuмent published by the Congregation entrusted with seminaries, on the subject of the year of spirituality, that it is the example given by our seminaries which is the origin of this letter addressed to the episcopate of the entire world.

On the other hand I do believe that I have done everything possible to demonstrate my sincere desire to find a solution to our problem.

I have never hesitated to come to Rome on being summoned by the Curia or the Secretary of State. Since Your Holiness entrusted my case to Cardinal Seper I have come to see him five times. I must add that I am rather sad at seeing no improvement in our position. While the penalties inflicted upon heretical theologians are very mild, I am still said to be suspended a divinis, even though I profess the Catholic Faith in its fullness.

The enemies of the Church, Masons, Communists, Modernists, with all the media at their disposal, fight fanatically against my work and against me, showing by this very fact that we are the best defenders and supporters of the Church, which they wish to destroy at any cost.

It is for this reason that a solution is urgently needed for the good of the Church. Your Holiness can, with complete confidence, count on us and on our priests to support you in your work of restoring the Truth and Sanctity of the Church, based on the indestructible rock of Tradition, the source of the ever renewed youth of the Church. Your Holiness could discern in the eyes and faces of our young priests this youth, the fruit of spiritual vitality.

Since His Eminence Cardinal Palazzini is willing to be the bearer of this request, could he not, in concert with Cardinal Seper, submit a definite plan for a solution, concerning firstly the Liturgy , then the official recognition of the Society of St. Pius X, as well as the institutes of male and female religious orders which have developed thanks to the maintenance of sound doctrine and traditional observances.

In entrusting this request to the Virgin Mary, may Your Holiness deign to allow me to express my most respectful and filial regards in Jesus and Mary.

JPM: I have not seen this before.When was it written?

1980. From Archbishop Lefebvre to the Pope.

I see,so this was not more tepid Dishwater from Bp.Fellay this was the Archbishop trying to reach out to Rome,you will notice however that once he realized that Rome had no intention of converting he refused to have any thing to do with them.Bp.Fellay just doesn't seem to understand does he,just has to have an aggreement.

JPM thought he had a gotcha, Richard.

Anyone who thinks that circuмstances don't matter, just consider that there is a huge difference between

A) an engaged couple acting as though they were married, on the day before their wedding.
B) a newlywed couple, married earlier that day, acting as though they were married.

Same behavior, only 1 day apart. But A) leads to an eternity in Hell, while B) is not even venially sinful. The devil really is in the details!

Just like in ancient times, you could have more or less "naturally virtuous" pagans, whereas today paganism is much more vicious, being an explicit rejection of Christ and His Gospel. You can't have "I didn't know any better; I was doing my best in the pagan darkness to be virtuous"

That's why today's POST-CHRISTIAN society is so much worse than your typical pagan society. It contains an implicit malice, being a rejection of Christ Who has already come and given us His law.

Likewise, Archbishop Lefebvre giving it one, last, Boy Scout try, to appeal to the Pope to allow the SSPX free reign, etc. was admirable. He didn't have our hindsight of Rome's behavior 1981 - 2015. But after the malice of Modern Rome became clear, and the depths to which they had sunk, +ABL's tune changed accordingly. He consecrated 4 bishops without Papal mandate in 1988, and his tune from then on until his death in 1991 was something along the lines of: "beware! DO NOT make a practical deal with Rome, whatever you do. We will have to wait until they convert."

Bp.Fellay attended a NO mass said in Latin and said that if the Archbishop had seen it he would have approved.While Bp.Williamson has given the green light to the NO mass, in some cases, he has always maintained that Tradition should stay away from an unconverted Rome,while Bp.Fellay can't wait to get back.

Likewise, Archbishop Lefebvre giving it one, last, Boy Scout try, to appeal to the Pope to allow the SSPX free reign, etc. was admirable. He didn't have our hindsight of Rome's behavior 1981 - 2015.

?? His last letter to the Pope in June of 1988 laments the fact that they could not reconcile in spite of the Archbishop's desire to do so. Furthermore, Rome's conversion was never a pre-condition.