We hold without reservation:

1. All twenty Doctrinal Councils in their de fide (of the faith) aspects, from Nicaea (325) through Vatican I (1870)
2. The Immaculate Conception of Our Lady (defined 1854)
3. Papal Infallibility as properly understood (defined 1870): When the Pope, as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church ex cathedra, he possesses infallibility
4. The Assumption of Our Lady (defined 1950)
5. All condemned heresies remain condemned, including Modernism (condemned by Pope St. Pius X in Pascendi)
6. Catholic Social Teaching, as articulated by Pope Leo XIII and illuminated by G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc—we reject both socialism and crony capitalism
7. The Social Reign of Christ the King over nations as the ideal (we recognize accommodation to present reality while working toward restoration)

We explicitly reject:

1. Deistic Syncretism: The notion that all religions worship the same God or lead to salvation. Islam does not worship our Triune God; Buddha is not a path to Christ; Pachamama is a demon
2. Teilhardian Evolutionary Theology: God does not evolve; creation does not complete God; the Omega Point is not the Beatific Vision
3. Religious Indifferentism: While we respect persons of all faiths and none, Truth matters; error has no rights
4. Modernist Moral Theology: Globalism, open borders ideology, climate alarmism, gender ideology, and the seamless garment heresy that equates abortion with climate policy
5. Liturgical Protestantization: Communion in the hand, table altars, versus populum orientation, vernacular-only Mass, desacralization
6. Democratic Church Governance: “Synodality” as currently practiced means democratizing divine revelation rather than its proper meaning of bishops consulting in council

We must be honest: Vatican II, in its implementation (and in some of its documents,) contradicts previous teaching. Consider:

On Religious Liberty:

• Previous Teaching (Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Leo XIII): Error has no rights; the Catholic state should privilege Truth
• Dignitatis Humanae: Religious liberty as a civil right for all religions

On Ecumenism:

• Previous Teaching (Pius XI, Mortalium Animos): Don’t participate in false worship; seek conversion of heretics
• Unitatis Redintegratio: Other Christian bodies as “means of salvation”; joint worship encouraged

On the Church:

• Previous Teaching (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis): The Catholic Church IS the Mystical Body of Christ
• Lumen Gentium: The Church of Christ “subsists in” the Catholic Church (introducing ambiguity).

On the Liturgy:

• Previous Teaching (Pius XII, Mediator Dei): The Mass is primarily a sacrifice; participation is an interior union with the priest’s offering
• Sacrosanctum Concilium (as implemented): The Mass is the assembly’s action; active participation means visible doing.

Pope Benedict XVI recognized this with his “hermeneutic of continuity”, the attempt to read Vatican II in harmony with Tradition. Noble effort. It failed. Pope Francis’s Traditionis Custodes proved that the new cannot tolerate the continued existence of the old because our very presence reminds people of what was lost.

This is where things get technical but important:

According to Canon Law (CIC 1983 Canon 205): We appear schismatic because we lack juridical communion with Rome.

According to Dominus Iesus §17: We are “true particular Churches” possessing “apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist,” maintaining “the closest bonds” with Rome.

Our position: We acknowledge an administrative separation from the current Roman authority. We do NOT claim to be a separate church from the one Our Lord founded theologically. We are custodians of the Roman Catholic Faith, operating under emergency principles due to the current crisis, awaiting reunion when Rome returns to orthodoxy.

We are not sedevacantists (those who say the See is vacant). We recognize there IS a Pope, even if the current occupant has repeatedly promulgated teachings contrary to Tradition. The question of when a pope’s actions constitute “defection from the faith” is above our pay grade. We will obey any legitimate command from Rome; we will not obey commands that violate the de fide teaching of the twenty councils or previous infallible declarations.

Our model: Think of us as similar to a Ukrainian Eparchy operating in a Roman diocese. We honor the office of Peter. We cannot comply with the current policies that contradict Tradition. We offer the old Mass, the old sacraments, the Old Faith to those who seek it, while maintaining our own jurisdiction and discipline.

Society of St. Pius X (SSPX): We applaud Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and believe he will likely be recognized as a great saint. Our difference with SSPX is primarily one of ecclesiology:

• They invoke the Pope and diocesan bishop in the Canon while not intending obedience (what we see as internal contradiction)
• They claim no jurisdiction of their own, operating under supplied jurisdiction
• Their bishops claim authority without territorial sees

We, by contrast:

• Do not invoke current Roman authorities in the Canon (honest about our position)
• Operate as a distinct jurisdiction under our own bishop, similar to a uniate rite
• Our Bishop of Caer-Glow has genuine ordinary jurisdiction over our clergy and faithful.

But these are tactical differences. We are co-workers in the same essential battle. We do not compete; we cooperate where possible.

Sedevacantist Communities: We have profound respect for sedevacantist scholarship and courage. They have identified the crisis correctly and may well be right about their theological conclusion that the papal office is vacant. We differ on ecclesiology and on whether we possess the authority to make that judgment definitively. We discuss this position more fully below (see “The Sedevacantist Position: Respect and Disagreement”), but in brief: we consider them brothers in arms who’ve reached a different tactical conclusion on the same strategic problem.

FSSP, ICKSP, and “Indult” Groups: We support their work and rejoice that they bring many souls to traditional worship. However, they operate under a fundamental compromise: they exist on a “reservation” within an organization whose leadership has demonstrably abandoned the telos (ultimate purpose) of Catholicism.

The question is not whether individual Novus Ordo priests are holy or individual parishes orthodox. The question is whether the organization itself, from the top, still maintains the Catholic Faith as its foundational principle and purpose. We believe the evidence says no.

Having the Old Mass in a zoo (gym), or on a reservation while the larger organization embraces a different religion is like being given a beautiful chapel inside a modernist megachurch. Eventually, the megachurch will close your chapel (see: Traditionis Custodes). Better to build your own structure on rock.

Approximately half of our clergy are married. This often raises eyebrows, so clarity is essential:

Our Position:

• Clerical celibacy is normative and preferable
• We highly encourage celibacy, and celibates are more likely to be elevated to the episcopate
• But celibacy is a discipline, not a doctrine
• The Apostles (except John) were married
• Saint Peter had a mother-in-law (thus a wife)
• Numerous early popes were married
• Saint Hilary of Poitiers, Doctor of the Church, “the Athanasius of the West,” was a married bishop
• Eastern Catholic Churches have always had married priests
• The West only imposed universal celibacy in the 12th century

Our Practice:

• Ordination freezes the marital state: A married man may be ordained, but an ordained celibate may not marry
• We must keep our promises to God: Once you vow celibacy, that vow stands
• Married clergy promises chastity but not celibacy: They are continent only as befits Christian marriage
• In practice, finding a suitable clergy wife is difficult: Not every woman can handle the unique demands of being married to a priest

We believe this ancient discipline, maintained by the East, represents authentic Catholic practice. Rome’s eventual acceptance of married Anglican convert priests vindicated this position.