Catholic Candle note: Below, we analyze Fr. Paul Robinson’s poisonous, Menzigen-approved1 lie from June 2017.

Fr. Robinson’s superior is Fr. Daniel Themann, the priest who gave a 2½-hour conference called Resistance to What, in April 2013. This conference is the N-SSPX’s most comprehensive collection of falsehoods and deception yet, promoting a deal with modernist Rome. An analysis of Fr. Themann’s pernicious conference, is available here: Open Letter to Fr. Daniel Themann

Two years after this conference and only six years after his ordination, the “new” SSPX promoted young Fr. Themann to the office of seminary rector and major superior.


It appears that modernist Rome will soon recognize the “new” SSPX and welcome the N-SSPX into the “big tent” of the conciliar church, alongside all the various groups of approved revolutionaries. All these groups approve (some more clearly and fully than others) Vatican II and the conciliar heresies which are the principal errors of our time. Of course, if any group strongly condemned conciliar errors and insisted that only Catholic Tradition is true (as the “old” SSPX did), modernist Rome would immediately denounce and excommunicate the leaders of that group.

The so-called “conservative” conciliar revolutionaries treat any uncompromising Traditional Catholic group as a pariah, as they did the “old” SSPX. But they freely hobnob with compromising, indult-type groups—just as so-called “bishop” Athanasius Schneider did in October 2017, when he spoke at the same conference with the “new” SSPX and other indult groups (Frat. of St. Peter & Instit. of Christ the King).2

To gain acceptance by modernist Rome, the N-SSPX no longer says that conciliar popes teach heresy3 (as they do) which damns souls (as it does). Instead, the “new” SSPX shamelessly praises most of what Pope Francis does.4 The N-SSPX praises Pope Francis as “moderate”.5 When Pope Francis teaches heresy, the “new” SSPX feebly says it is uncomfortable and concerned about what appears to be arguably a departure from the teaching of his predecessors.6

One sign of the approaching recognition, is the feverish whirling of the N-SSPX spin doctors. For example, in a June 2017 article written by Fr. Paul Robinson, the N-SSPX declares that Archbishop Lefebvre and the (old) SSPX never insisted on having the same faith as the pope before the SSPX would submit to Rome’s practical control. Here is this recent N-SSPX declaration:

The “strict unity of faith before canonical recognition” position has never, at any time, been the official position of the SSPX, neither in the time of the Archbishop nor since his death.7

The N-SSPX is lying to its uninformed followers!

Fr. Robinson Opposes this Well-Known Truth: Archbishop Lefebvre and the (Old) SSPX Demanded Strict Unity of Faith before Canonical Recognition.

Archbishop Lefebvre declared:

It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith.8

In 2011, Bishop Fellay declared that, without unity of faith, recognition is dangerous and unlivable. Here are his words:

For we have not forgotten that there are many doctrinal differences at the origin of the dispute between Rome and us these past forty years; setting them aside in order to obtain a canonical status would expose us to the danger of seeing the same differences crop up inevitably, which would make the canonical status not just precarious but quite simply unlivable.9

In 2006, Bishop Fellay declared that, without unity of faith, recognition is suicide:

As long as Vatican II and the New Mass remain the norm, an agreement with Rome is suicide.10

Not only did Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Fellay teach this, but the SSPX General Chapter did too. The General Chapter is the highest authority in the SSPX (over even the superior general) and is composed mostly of SSPX’s major superiors.

In 2006, the SSPX General Chapter declared that it would be impossible to make an agreement with Rome until Rome returns to the faith. Here are the General Chapter’s words:

[T]he contacts made from time to time with the authorities in Rome have no other purpose than to help them embrace once again that Tradition which the Church cannot repudiate without losing her identity. The purpose is not just to benefit the Society, nor to arrive at some merely practical impossible agreement. When Tradition comes back into its own, “reconciliation will no longer be a problem, and the Church will spring back to life”.11

The “new” SSPX now overturns this firm and crucial principle. Worse yet, the “new” SSPX now even denies the SSPX ever taught its prior principle.


The contrast could not be plainer. Archbishop Lefebvre and the “old” SSPX firmly declared that it is our duty to remain separate until Rome regains the faith. The “new” SSPX denies that Archbishop Lefebvre and the “old” SSPX ever taught this or thought this.

Even if Fr. Robinson sincerely believed his own pernicious falsehood, Menzingen approved his statement. Can anyone believe that Menzingen is ignorant that the “old” SSPX taught the opposite? Menzingen is lying.

Learn this lesson: don’t trust the “new” SSPX to tell you the truth!

The “new” SSPX’s leadership uses lies and deceit to lead its priests and followers into the conciliar swamp. Let us pray for them all!

  1. The “new” SSPX states this approval here:

  2. Fr. Jonathan Loop is the N-SSPX liberal who spoke at this conference.

  3. Heresy is an error about the Catholic Faith. Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas explains this truth:

    We are speaking of heresy now as denoting a corruption of the Christian Faith. Now it does not imply a corruption of the Christian faith, if a man has a false opinion in matters that are not of faith, for instance, in questions of geometry and so forth, which cannot belong to the faith by any means; but only when a person has a false opinion about things belonging to the faith.

    Now a thing may be of the faith in two ways, as stated above, in one way, directly and principally, e.g. the articles of faith; in another way, indirectly and secondarily, e.g. those matters, the denial of which leads to the corruption of some article of faith; and there may be heresy in either way, even as there can be faith.

    Summa, IIa IIae, Q.11, a.2, respondeo (emphasis added).

    Catholics must judge words and deeds objectively. But we must never judge a person’s interior, subjective culpability for sins, because that would be the sin of rash judgment. Thus, we don’t rashly judge that Francis is not pope because of the heretical statements he makes. Read the explanation found here: Rash judgment: concluding the pope is a formal heretic

  4. For example, Bishop Fellay praises Pope Francis’s Amoris Laetitia (on marriage) and compares it to a “beautiful boat” with a “very small” leak in it. Read Bishop Fellay’s own words, cited to his own source: Bishop Fellay mostly approves of Pope Francis’ recent modernist document eroding marriage and the Natural Law

  5. For example, read the N-SSPX’s own words, cited to its own source: The new SSPX praises Pope Francis as being “moderate” in his latest conciliar initiative promoting married so-called priests

  6. For example, read Bishop Fellay’s words, cited to his own source:

  7. Quoted from: (emphasis added; quote marks in the original)

  8. Spiritual Journey, by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, ch.3 (emphasis added).

  9. November 28, 2011 Bishop Fellay conference, found at this link: (emphasis added).

  10. Bishop Fellay conference in Écône, on September 8, 2006, found at this link:

  11. 2006 SSPX General Chapter Statement (bold emphasis added; italic in the original).