I am not currently able to watch videos but I am curious as to what is contained in this video. 

Does Father Chazal think Hounder is like a New St. Vitus and therefore a good addition to the traditional movement?

No, quite the opposite.

Its a good, short (13 minute) exposition of the danger Huonder represents to the SSPX; how both his advent within the SSPX, and his subsequent activities within the SSPX, represent the gradual and deepening ensnarement and entanglement of the SSPX in conciliarism.

My wife and I watched it with our morning coffee, and it sparked some commentary on why the Resistance is so necessary today, the subject of which I may or may not write more about.

We discussed how the history of the Church is a history of cleavings, throughout its 7 ages (a la Williamson) all the way up to Vatican II, and how that same pattern of cleavings fixated on the SSPX after the council.

It seems, as Fr. Chazal says, it will be almost impossible for the SSPX to extricate itself from the spider’s web, and it’s hostility to the Resistance shows it does not want to be extricated.

The SSPX today believes that “conciliarism light” (Chazal’s term) is where it needs to be to save itself, and it will brook no opposition, thinking that it’s own ѕυιcιdє is a “necessary reconciliation.”

It has been outsmarted (who can forget +Fellay’s 2016 Australia conference, where he assures us that it is not a trap, and that modernist Rome wants tradition to spread in the Church, contrasting with +Ganswein’s revelation that BXVI’s continual goal was to separate as many from Lefebvrism as possible)?

The SSPX today is blind.  “Because you have not loved the truth, I will send an operation of error, that you should believe lying.”

The Resistance is essential to the recovery of the Church, because we are the Remnant of those who have not been tricked off the field of battle.  Miserable as we are, squabbling, disagreeing, we still have swords in hand, and still stand against the same enemy and the same revolution which has now captured the SSPX.

No, quite the opposite.

Its a good, short (13 minute) exposition of the danger Huonder represents to the SSPX; how both his advent within the SSPX, and his subsequent activities within the SSPX, represent the gradual and deepening ensnarement and entanglement of the SSPX in conciliarism.

My wife and I watched it with our morning coffee, and it sparked some commentary on why the Resistance is so necessary today, the subject of which I may or may not write more about.

We discussed how the history of the Church is a history of cleavings, throughout its 7 ages (a la Williamson) all the way up to Vatican II, and how that same pattern of cleavings fixated on the SSPX after the council.

It seems, as Fr. Chazal says, it will be almost impossible for the SSPX to extricate itself from the spider’s web, and it’s hostility to the Resistance shows it does not want to be extricated.

The SSPX today believes that “conciliarism light” (Chazal’s term) is where it needs to be to save itself, and it will brook no opposition, thinking that it’s own ѕυιcιdє is a “necessary reconciliation.”

It has been outsmarted (who can forget +Fellay’s 2016 Australia conference, where he assures us that it is not a trap, and that modernist Rome wants tradition to spread in the Church, contrasting with +Ganswein’s revelation that BXVI’s continual goal was to separate as many from Lefebvrism as possible)?

The SSPX today is blind.  “Because you have not loved the truth, I will send an operation of error, that you should believe lying.”

The Resistance is essential to the recovery of the Church, because we are the Remnant of those who have not been tricked off the field of battle.  Miserable as we are, squabbling, disagreeing, we still have swords in hand, and still stand against the same enemy and the same revolution which has now captured the SSPX.

Thank you so much!  I was hoping that the title was sarcastic or satirically talking of the SSPX.  I have a lot of respect for Father Chazal.  😇