Fr. Chazal breaks with Archbishop Lefebvre; begins hybrid


Deleted member 149

In an amazing, yet sad, declaration in Fr. Chazal newest Miles Christi edition (June 2016), Fr. Chazal made new changes from his former position of 2012 declaration –“No compromise; War On”- to one of a 2016 hybrid/independent expediency position under Bishop Williamson’s loose independence auspice. Strange ways of man make strange beginnings.

“The spirit was willing, but the flesh was swept away” was Fr. Chazal’s opening words in his MilesChristi. How true it is now applied to his own announcement.

First, starting on page four, Fr. Chazal begins his “charity” to another catholic priest by publicly removing his proper name of father (Fr.) and respect of priesthood, not once, but three derogatory times in his letter; being of course against Fr. Pfeiffer. Though minor in itself, it shows a pattern and behavior of mind so typical of the false resistance: degrade another under “charity” while trying to hide an independent “superiority” complex. Why not let the truth itself be served with honor however it lay without mixing in emotion and personal attacks.

Following is Fr. Chazal’s announcement.

For ease, I have on this point and section of his newsletter, transcribed word for word his hand written MilesChristi edition to a typed copy. There are a lot of clauses he stated within it that needs to be unpacked, so I will comment in red between them.

The original is in downloadable file below.


Fr. Chazal said:

(page 5-6)

The “Compagnie de Marie” / Marian Corps.

“A full fledged Carmelite branch of the resistance is still a distant prospect, yet things went ahead in the Marian Corps, with Rev. Fathers McDonald, Salenave & Ballini joining the four others. [In this sentence, it is not quite clear what he means by “joining four others” when the name “Marian Corps” belongs to the sspx-mc since 2013; though below Fr. Chazal begins to elaborate.] This by no means signifies that we are Pfeifferizing, [Pfeifferizing? You mean the “War On” 2012 organizing to remain sspx priests in the one and same structure the Church blessed and continues in the sspx-mc?] since we reject the use of the name of SSPX, while keeping St. Pius x as our Holy Patron. Like the SSPX SO (strict observance) of yore, the wrongful demonization of the “SSPX-mc” might stick to us for a while or so, while our name is MCSPX [Marian Corp St. Pius X], and current name is Marian Corps. [Fr. Chazal is beginning to announce that he is breaking away from the life-branch of the sspx structure and its continuation within the sspx-mc itself he once fought to uphold.]

“Moreover, all of us agree that the powers of the superior general must be curtailed lest we repeat the errors of Menzingen, and in this we also differ with Fr. Pfeiffer who perhaps thinks that the “heresy of loose organization” includes canonical definitors, a reduced and non immediately renewable mandate of six years and devolution of powers at the district (or regional) level. For us it is clear, until Peter II and the Great Monarch both materialize, that the more we pile powers on one inflatable ego, the more he is going to accumulate booboos. [In materializing his new vision, Fr. Chazal is breaking down the order and structure of Archbishop Lefebvre whose guidance with wisdom was canonically blessed by the Church in statute and constitution. Limiting authority is to lose authority. This is precisely the foundation and error of BW’s “loose” independent structure. The “errors” of Menzingen (and could be said of Rome) are personal sins; not because of the scope of objective authority over individuals in a religious environment. When a superior is wrong in doctrine, it is the duty of those inferiors to uphold the faith; which those priests in the neo-sspx didn’t do; is why there is a wholesale collapse in Menzingen. A “loose” organization is a “heresy” to the existence and essence to the body of the Church. Imagine if each organ in a human body decided to go loose and independent from one another without the primacy of the objective soul in authority in duty and scope to govern within its spiritual and material order; the body dies; so too does a Catholic in a loose order. Moreover, for Fr. Chazal to invoke a condition to God to “materialize” Peter II and the Great Monarch is a blaspheme against God and his choice to guide his Church militant through some suffering and want; precisely because of infidelity and flagrant disobedience to his order and will. Catholicism is not democracy, condition, and debates. “Booboos” are inherent to all superiors no matter what “limitations” they have. It is the human condition in need of humility and the Redeemer. BTW, is an “inflatable ego” a proper description to speak of a superior?]

“And there are not yet enough feathered Indians to elect this big plumed thing even if I told Fr. MacDonald he would make a good SG. As he is senior most and very down to earth. [Again, is this a way to speak of a superior – a “big plumed thing”? I see an independent spirit here; and one of contempt of authority. Further, Fr. Chazal is flatly saying that his new group will NOT have a superior to begin with. They will start “unified” loosely in bond of community (common life), not in virtue of obedience embodied in the Catholic faith, but within a new hybrid structure he defines below.]

“Some confreres don’t agree with us continuing the society of common life for priests along the same spirit as envisaged by Archbishop Lefebvre, so the priestly union is perfect for them, and may God bless them and multiply their fruits; but we don’t want to throw the baby with the water of the bath…that baby is a clearly defined canonical status; a great rule, based on the practice of the gifts of the Holy Ghost; great ceremonies, especially the form of engagement of December 8th; provisions for brothers and sisters. [How can Fr. Chazal say on one hand that a “canonical status, rule, etc” is the “baby” (the principle) with spirit and gifts of the Holy Ghost is a true path and at the same time those priests who do not live that path can be possibly “perfect” and blessed by God; including to bear fruit? Two standards; two principles; too confusing! Again, Fr. Chazal is joining the loose independence auspice of BW that refuses structure and authority, so how does Fr. Chazal think he is going to survive in their bubble? He won’t. The joy from these independent priests and their followers is one of Fr. Chazal leaving his promise and security in the old-sspx declaration of 2012 (No compromise; War On) and is only tolerated until they will turn on him to compromise more. Such is the road of giving in.] No need to reinvent the wheel, no need to morph into something all too different from what we were, as it is the neo SSPX that is losing its priestly identity by joining the so unpriestly and so unsacrificial conciliar church. [There are the underlining words. Fr. Chazal said “from what we were”. He is openly stating he is breaking from the living-branch of the Holy Church obtained by providence through/was his/their founder Archbishop Lefebvre. All grace from the God given blessed living (canonical) branch of the Church is now gone and thrown in the mud by lack of faith and placed on expediency on personage and their “opinions” who said that “I could be wrong” in what he/they are doing living a “loose” independent life. Very sad.]

“Interestingly, it is Bishop Williamson who is also noticing that when a priest is left too much for himself, he develops defects. [Exactly! This is the consequence of the independent spirit from Catholic order. Yet, Fr. Chazal still wants to go into that environment (in expediency of a bishop) with no superior in that loose mentality with his hybrid vision. (sic)] Also, as we see in Australia & New Zealand, there is a need to project force in places where it is sorely needed. [How can you “project force” with independence? Strange.] The Benedictines, Dominicans (and perhaps Capuchins & Carmelites) are super undisorganized. Fix the wheel, don’t invent it again, especially as what needs repair is obvious and simple to repair. [Then why is this idea not directed to the loose priests to remain and maintain their existence as sspx priests in the continuation of their sspx order blessed by the Church continued in the sspx(mc)? ]

“2016 might be one of the best “millesimes” (?translation) of the resistance, as we all eagerly await the outcome of the current standoff between Morgon and Menzingen, who refused to ordain their priestly candidates this year. [We hear this as a “great” thing. Why? Morgon is complaining and causing an internal ruse ONLY because of being denied ordination from Bishop Fellay. Where is the public uproar of the betrayal of the faith? We can hear a pin drop. No great thing there.] And our episcopal succession is totally secure. [Now here is the main reason of Fr. Chazal’s decision to break and leave the real order of Archbishop Lefebvre and to start a hybrid order of likeness (imitation) of Archbishop Lefebvre –it is out of expediency- to secure himself with a bishop; even if he is in error. Isn’t this the SAME answer we hear from the neo-sspx people wanting to stay within the neo-sspx –because they have bishops- even if they are in error? And the SAME answer we hear from those in the novus ordo wanting to stay in the conciliar church -because they have a pope- even if he is in error?

Because Bishop Williamson refuses to organize and lead in the guidance of Archbishop Lefebvre, Fr. Chazal instead is leaving Archbishop Lefebvre from the secure and blessed order to go into BW's auspice that is loose-independent and evolving. Very backwards.

The faith does NOT need bishops or a Pope for its existence. It stands alone. The object of the faith is God; not dependent on institutionalism or prelatism. It is the faith that created the visible structure of the Church giving the members guidance through the instruments of bishops and a pope visibly to organize and ordain God’s decrees. It is the bishops and pope that need the faith for their existence. The authority the bishops and pope have is derived by God in the faith; not the other way around.

For Fr. Chazal to put insence on Bishop Williamson’s loose opinions and errors is its own betrayal from his once stated “No compromise; War On”.]

“On the much wider scale, humanity is lining up for a grand divine correction with a gradual entry in WWIII. Yet again, God’s intent is to repair, even if it means trimming the lower branches. [So if it is to “repair” why defect and break away from the life blood of your founder Archbishop Lefebvre and follow what is clearly a revolution of independent thought? Bishop Williamson said “It is not clear that the present need is to rebuild a classic Congregation or Seminary. Both may be somehow out-dated. … But God is God, and for the salvation of souls tomorrow it may be that he will no longer resort to the classical Congregation or seminary of yesterday.” (Eleison Comments’ #278). And “Even if all the laity want to obey me, even if all the priests want to obey me, […] can you imagine that commanding resistant priests is like trying to herd cats? Can you imagine, is it unimaginable? In which case, is it worth trying if it’s bound to fail? It may be better not to attempt than to attempt and fail…” (Post Falls, ID (USA), 1st June, 2014). In other words, we shouldn’t try to get priests to work together. It’s bound to fail, so it’s better not to attempt it at all. This is what Fr. Chazal is joining and committing himself to. (sic)]

“Let us hope and pray that we recognize, accept and use all the kind corrections, crosses, setbacks and tribulations that our Father sends us because He loves us, and like any good Father, is capable to make tough decisions. Whose name we sanctify.” [I’m not sure how to respond to that statement. We have been trying to offer him “kind correction” in Archbishop Lefebvre’s own words; he refuses to listen. Perhaps it is open disdain for superiors having a “inflatable ego” and being a “big plumed thing”. God have mercy on him…]

[Fr. Chazal]


See here for resources; the Fr. Chazal of past:


Quote: “The Holy Virgin will have the victory. She will triumph over the great apostasy, the fruit of Liberalism. One more reason not to twiddle our thumbs! We have to fight more than ever for the social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ. In this battle, we are not alone; we have with us all the popes up through Pius XII inclusively. All of them combatted Liberalism in order to deliver the Church from it. God did not grant that they succeed, but this is not reason to lay down our weapons! We have to hold on. We have to build, while the others are demolishing. The crumbled citadels have to be rebuilt, the bastions of the Faith to be reconstructed: firstly the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass of all times, which forms saints; then our chapels, which are our true parishes; our monasteries; our large families, our enterprises faithful to the social doctrine of the Church; our politicians determined to make the politics of Jesus Christ – this a whole tissue of Christian social life, Christian customs, Christian reflexes, which we have to restore, on the scale that God wants, at the time God wills. All that I know, the Faith teaches us, it is that Our Lord Jesus Christ must reign here below, now, and not only at the end of the world, as the Liberals would have it!

While they are destroying, we have the contentment of rebuilding. A still greater happiness: generations of young priests are participating with zeal in this task of reconstruction of the Church for the salvation of souls.” (They Have Uncrowned Him; chapter XXXIV)

So where are the many signatories up holding that statement to rebuild when in fact they are tearing down with novus ordo language “The new religion can build your Faith.(1) “Attending the New Mass can build your Faith. (2) Do whatever you think you need to do to keep the Faith, which can include attending the Novus Ordo Mass. (3)” and on and on…?


Last edited by a moderator:


since we reject the use of the name of SSPX, while keeping St. Pius x as our Holy Patron. Like the SSPX SO (strict observance) of yore, the wrongful demonization of the “SSPX-mc” might stick to us for a while or so, while our name is MCSPX [Marian Corp St. Pius X], and current name is Marian Corps. [Fr. Chazal is beginning to announce that he is breaking away from the life-branch of the sspx structure and its continuation within the sspx-mc itself he once fought to uphold.]
This is particularly worrisome. Any priest or group of priests who deliberately break away from the SSPX as it was intended to function by +ABL, shows that they are deviating from the path illuminated by the Archbishop. They no longer claim his patronage and guiding principles. It is only when he is abandoned can these erroneous principles (allowing for grace in the New Mass, Loose Association, etc.) be implemented. While one claims to be a part of the SSPX as intended by ABL, there is no room for such error.

So the Archbishop must be thrown off, rejected, for these new priestly societies to go forward.

I think the irony is interesting when comparing the current SSPX and the false resistance. They really are going in the same direction. They just have different names for what they are doing. Both are abandoning ABL. Both are accepting 'minuscule' amounts of grace and miracles in the Novus Ordo - once this is said/done - it allows for Vatican II to be interpreted in the 'light of Tradition'. And will drag many souls with them. The Final Roundup by the enemies of God. Gather those last Traditional Catholics (herded under the new SSPX and the False Resistance) and bring them into the false conciliar Church.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!

Deleted member 149

Fr. Chazal said in 2013:

...its aim is “the Priesthood and all that concern it and nothing else than it." "...The Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) is therefore a priestly congregation founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. It was erected officially in conformity with Canon Law in the diocese of Fribourg, Switzerland, on February 18, 1971. Since it has been recognized by the competent authorities, it is a work of the Catholic Church, for the Priesthood, as foretold by Our Lady of Quito, a long time ago.

"Forty years later, that Priesthood suffered a terrible offense, when the Superiors of the SSPX, lured by the new Rome of liberal and modernist tendencies, began to recognize the Council of Vatican II, the New Mass and the New Code of Canon Law."

"The first,and maybe most important point is that we remain and will always be priests of the Society of St Pius the tenth. Our expulsion is invalid because we upheld the will of the Founder, and the goal of our institute which is the Priesthood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. That Priesthood suffers a terrible offence once Vatican II and the new mass and all wicked reforms, especially the New Code, begin to be recognized suicidally by the top management of the Order itself, notwithstanding the practice of double talk.

"Hence we refuse to admit to be the authors of the separation between the official sspx and a remnant of it who adheres exactly to the original notion of the society. Our Antimodernist Oath, the "promitto" of our ordinations, our original engagement formula and the vows taken by those who can no longer accept the unacceptable, precisely because of these commitments, remain in full force, nay, are indeed fulfilled on this painful occasion.

"...To think ourselves wiser than the Archbishop would be certainly presomptuous.By keeping the name SSPX, we also retain automatically the other name of our order "Apostles of Jesus and Mary".

"Hence, while the name sspx has to remain, a qualifier has to be added.

"As the xspx, Fr Wegner saying, is clearly rebranding itself as a non fighting corporation, changing the tone of its public speech, while its founder famously described if as a little army of rebuilders, we need to stand firm against the liberal evils of this time:

# the recurrent desire to conform to this modern world,

# the desire to be accepted and recognized in our differences,

# the growing tiredness, apathy and loss of priestly flame, (something not too surprising after forty years of struggle).

# and lastly, the reigning intellectual anarchy.

Francois Chazal SSPX Marian Corps.

Fr. Chazal now says in expediency to follow Bishop Williamson, 2016:

"This by no means signifies that we are Pfeifferizing, since we reject the use of the name of SSPX, while keeping St. Pius X as our Holy Patron."
Francois Chazal, Miles Christi edition, June 2016 (above)

"Of course we lament such expressions as "go to the novus ordo mass if it is good for your faith", but, wait a minute, why should we deny the dino the benefit of the doubt when we gave it to bishop Fellay?

"...Moreover one should not blame us to thread carefully with bishops. A priest is a sacramental dead end, down the line, as things revolve around bishops as per canon law, rituals, sacraments, and even sacramentals. As we can see today, the bishop ensures the continuity and survival of a sacramental line."

"...And our episcopal succession is totally secure."
Francois Chazal, Miles Christi edition, June 2016 (above)

"I'd rather stick to the dino."

Knowing FULL well what Bishop Williamson said in "liberal and modernist tendency" about the conciliar church:
  • By distancing yourself from the conciliar church, you are putting yourself in danger and risk becoming a Pharisee who is disconnected from reality. (11)
  • The new religion can build your Faith. (1)
  • Attending the Novus Ordo may do more good than harm spiritually. (6)
  • Not every priest needs to leave the conciliar church or stop saying the Novus Ordo Mass. (7)
  • The problem with Vatican II is that it is ambiguous. (10)
  • [And one of his loose priests says, without reproached from BW] There might be salvation outside the conciliar church. (16)
  • [And] Archbishop Lefebvre resisted the new orientation which came about after the Council. But he also desired to re-establish union with the Vicar of Christ as soon as possible. That is what he stood for more than anything else. (18)
  • There’s still something Catholic in the conciliar church, so it’s wrong for us to reject it completely. (19)

Knowing FULL well what Bishop Williamson said in "liberal and modernist tendency" about the new mass:
  • Attending the New Mass can build your Faith. (2)
  • Do whatever you think you need to do to keep the Faith, which can include attending the Novus Ordo Mass. (3)
  • [Stated in June 2015] If you attend the Novus Ordo Mass you have to be careful, but you can find the grace of God there and sanctify your soul. (4)
  • Not everyone needs to avoid the Novus Ordo Mass. (5)
  • The Novus Ordo Mass does not always undermine the Faith, though frequently it does. (8)
  • The problem with the Novus Ordo Mass is that it is ambiguous. It can be made to favour the new religion, but does not have to, it can also be done in line with the old religion. (9)
  • We must accept the supposed ‘Eucharistic miracles’ of the Novus Ordo Mass as genuine. (12)
  • The Eucharistic miracles of the Novus Ordo Mass have lessons for Traditional Catholics, one of which is that the Novus Ordo Mass doesn’t always have to be avoided. (13)
  • The Novus Ordo Mass is not as good as the Traditional Mass, but it is still better than nothing. (14)

Knowing FULL well what Bishop Williamson said in "liberal and modernist tendency" about Congregations and seminaries:
  • Congregations and seminaries are not needed today. They are outdated. God does not want there to be a structure or congregation for the Resistance. (20)
  • Seminarians who are ready for ordination should not be ordained, because there is no structure or congregation for them to be ordained into. (21)
  • We shouldn’t try to get priests to work together. It’s bound to fail, so it’s better not to attempt it at all. (22)

Knowing FULL well what Bishop Williamson said in "liberal and modernist tendency" about anyone who goes against him:
  • Bishop Thomas Aquinas said: "People who disagree with or criticise Bishop Williamson should not be made welcome. Priests who disagree with or criticise Bishop Williamson should not be received and the faithful should not go to their Mass. Criticising Bishop Williamson has consequences. (23)"

Yet Fr. Chazal went over to BW errors anyway into what he called "liberal and modernist tendencies" and "a terrible offense". But he blames us and Fr. Pfeiffer sspx-mc for maintaining what he abandoned. (sic)

So who has changed toward "liberal and modernist tendencies" and re-branded himself...?
Last edited by a moderator:


Well-Known Member
Fr Chazal is not trusting in Divine Providence....Like the good Fathers of OLMC If we lack a bishop, Our Mother is watching over us and. In God's own time we will be provided one. But if we dont defend the ABSOLUTE PURITY OF THE FAITH everywhere and at all times, we end up in confusion and usually end up falling into error. Fr Chazal did right by standing against Bishop Fellay, why not now in true charity is he afraid to rebuke Bishop Williamson's errors?

Bishop Thomas Aquinas said: "People who disagree with or criticise Bishop Williamson should not be made welcome. Priests who disagree with or criticise Bishop Williamson should not be received and the faithful should not go to their Mass. Criticising Bishop Williamson has consequences. (23)"

The above statement is the same thinking the people who remained in the SSPX said about Bishop Fellay. Its a disgrace before God and to every martyr who shed their blood for the Faith. If the Great Archbishop compromised as these bishops are, Tradition and the formation of true priests would have came to a complete halt in 1965. But because the Archbishop by the Grace of God , uncompromisingly did the Divine Will, the True Faith with well-formed priests was able to continue.
The church has been around for over 2,000 years, only because of those saints and martyrs who fought EVERY ERROR that arose, not by compromising or raising a personality over the truth. So for the sake of their souls, I pray these priests and Bishops wake up. unless, of course, their true motive is NOT the love of God and defense of the Faith and ultimately the salvation of Souls! And that, of course, is also for the priests who follow the bishop but keep silent!