Bishop Fellay back in March 2012:


Bp. FELLAY, WORDS OF THE SUPERIOR GENERAL, COR UNUM No. 101, March 2012:

..."The situation of the Church may require us to take prudent measures related and relevant to the specific situation. The General Chapter of 2006 issued a clear course of action in regard to our situation with Rome. We give priority to faith without searching our side a practical solution to resolve the issue BEFORE doctrinal.
This is not a principle but a line of conduct which must govern our actions. We're here in front of reasoning in which the major premise is the affirmation of the principle of the primacy of faith to remain Catholic. The minor premise is a historical observation on the current situation of the Church and the practical conclusion is based on the virtue of prudence governing human action, nothing to seek agreement to the detriment of the faith. In 2006, the heresies continue to emerge, the same authorities and spread the modern spirit of Vatican II modernist and imposed on all like a steamroller (is the minor premise). It is impossible to reach a workable agreement unless authorities become, otherwise we would be crushed, shredded, destroyed or subjected to such strong pressure that we could not resist ('s the conclusion).

If the minor premise changed, ie if there is a change in the situation of the Church in relation to the Tradition, this could lead to a corresponding change in the conclusion, that our principles have not changed at all! As Providence is expressed through the reality of the facts, to know His will, we must follow closely the reality of the Church, observing, examining what happens.

But there is no doubt that since 2006, we are witnessing a development in the Church, an important and interesting change, but not very visible. However, this trend, helped by the measures, though timid, conducted by the Sovereign Pontiff in regard to the internal life of the Church, is also offset by a large part of the hierarchy that wants nothing of it . Moreover, the internal restoration attempt you put "under a bushel" with the constant affirmation of the importance of Vatican II and its reforms. In particular, having to do with the life of the Church ad extra, its relations with the world, with other religions and with States.

We are witnessing an opposite and unequal double movement:

The hierarchy, composed of the people who did the Council (now almost extinct generation) and those who have applied to the Council, which passed the Church before the Council-traditional, but marked in part by the appetite of the news- Church to reconcile or post-conciliar, with a crazy obsession with novelty, with the catastrophe that followed. Most do not want to go back, maybe some of them admit that there were abuses, etc., Even a crisis, but the cause may never be on the council.

On the other hand, later generations have another look at the state of the Church. These do not have that visceral emotional bond with a Council that they themselves have not known. And much less know the pre-Council. Some within these generations, more numerous than you think, do not even know that there was another rite before. What they see is a very sad decline and little exciting, experiencing frustration and deep disappointment: the monasteries are closed, the lack of vocations is felt everywhere, the churches are empty. Having received a good and sound doctrine, not sure what they have lost, but when they realize, a little thanks to the contact with the tradition, then experience a great bitterness, feel betrayed, deprived of this immense treasure. This movement is growing, obviously, a bit all over the world, especially among the young priests and seminarians from. Escape to the hierarchy, in part, which tries to drown this desire from the beginning, this trend of restoring the Church.

The few acts of Benedict XVI in this sense, acts affecting ad intra liturgy, discipline, morals are important because, although implementation still leaves to be desired.

We note, however, some of these elements even among the younger bishops, some of which we clearly express his sympathies, but discreetly, or even a substantive agreement: "Courage, continue, stay as you are, you are our hope. ..! "are no longer rare words in the mouths Episcopalians who we are.

It maybe in Rome where these things are more obvious! We now have friendly contacts in the departments most important, also among those closest to the Pope!

Our perception of the situation is such that we believe that the efforts of the hierarchy can not stop aging over this movement birthplace she wants and expects even vaguely - the restoration of the Church. While one should not exclude the return of a "Julian the Apostate" I do not think this movement could be stopped.

If this is true, and that's for sure, it demands of us a new position in relation to the official Church. "...

Regarding no practical solution before the doctrinal issues are resolved in Rome, Bishop Fellay says:

"This is not a principle, but a line of conduct."

That is like looking at water and saying, "This is not water, but a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen."

In other words, whether you say it was a principle of Archbishop Lefebvre, or the line of conduct of Archbishop Lefebvre, it was clearly the position of Archbishop Lefebvre.