Source: https://www.piusx.org.

pl/zawsze_wierni/artykul/2994

Translation from Polish courtesy of Eva Devaux - https://www.edtranslationservices.com

As printed in Zawsze Wierni (Always Faithful) No. 5 – 2021

To save one’s own priestly vocation…

Why do priests decide to join the Society of St Pius X? We hand over to the reader a letter from Father
Cyprian Kolendo OFM to the superior of the Order, Father Provincial Alan Tomasz Brzyski, presenting
his reasons for leaving the Order and moving to the FSSPX.

Reverend Provincial Father,

I write this letter with great pain, but at the same time with the knowledge that it is impossible to continue in
the state of conscience in which I am, without harming my own salvation. For nearly a year now, I have come
to see the ideals that guided me when I joined the Order fade, and pastoral and liturgical practice has in fact
become a devilish distortion.

For years, I believed that my traditionalism is reconcilable with the environment in which I function, that it is
a path that the faithful need to be reminded of for their spiritual benefit. I wanted to lead through my ministry
to the evolutionary transition of the faithful from the existing state to the Catholic Tradition. I was under the
illusion that the voice of a few traditional hierarchs, such as Bishop Athanasius Schneider or Cardinal Robert
Sarah, could serve me as a support, reassurance, and signpost, but ... I was deeply mistaken, because these
faithful prelates are consistently pushed to the margins.

I was aware of the fight for the Church, but I was not aware of how it was infiltrated by any error coming from
a morbid attempt to adapt it to the world. The Polish Church appeared to me as a refuge, as a still healthy
spiritual tissue. However, the reality of the “test” showed something completely different. The time of covid
manipulations is a period when the “intentions of many hearts came out.”

The diagnosis for every believer interested in the history of the Church is clear. There is a remarkable
ignorance for the warning efforts of popes of the 19th and 20th centuries, such as the instruction Alta vendita,
which Pius IX and Leo XIII published to illustrate the devilish plan aimed at the Church. Encyclicals such as
Mirari vos, Pascendi Dominici gregis, Quanta cura and Syllabus, as well as other ones meant to put a dam for
the mistakes of modernity, were also ignored. Even today, it is not difficult to read them in the right context
and understand what they refer to and what they condemn.

Of course, this is a great simplification—but certainly, the sources of the current state of the Church must be
seen in the infiltration of the Church with trends in philosophy and theological errors that were clearly
condemned by the Magisterium decades earlier. The rhetorical question is: where (then) was the obedience
that is so famous today?

In Polish conditions, the crisis of the Church is closely connected with the history of political transformation.
The lack of lustration of clergy, [Translator’s note: “Lustration” refers to communism and the government.
Many communists were sent into the Church to destroy it from the inside. They were also referred to as
“sleepers,” agents that can wait even a couple of decades for the green light to start playing their destructive
role. The author is saying that bad priests were not purged from the ranks.] especially among the hierarchy,
preserved people with at least dubious qualities in the highest positions. This state caused years of declining
moral standards for the clergy, and today everything is topped off by the compromising attitude of the
hierarchs in the face of the fall of unfortunately numerous subordinates. On the other hand, an assassination
of the doctrine was carried out by allowing the voice of (and not responding to) the openly non-Catholic
content made public under the guise of freedom of theological research.

Today, with full focus, I see the Polish Church moving towards the implementation of all modernist ideas.
Meanwhile, I have a sense of being the only one in the province who does not accept such a state, because
silence or silent criticism—behind which there is no resistance—is ultimately acceptance. The lack of
common faith and sensitivity to fundamental issues will not be obscured by my often very fraternal relations
with many confreres.

Therefore, everything that has happened in my life in the last year puts me in a state of higher necessity.

The present tragic state of the Church can probably be compared only to the Aryan crisis, in which, by
listening to heretical bishops, one's own salvation was jeopardized.

The principle of totalitarian rights to violate the conscience of anyone who has taken a vow and is in the
hierarchy has been imposed on all of this. Ordering to do things unworthy or harmful, in the light of the
Church's documents, is clearly condemned. Such rights are claimed by the hierarchy, forgetting that God was,
is, and should be the ultimate recipient of every canonical vow.

One of the venerable priests once told me:

“Consider whether your provincial and bishop will go with you to the Last Judgment, whether they will be
your advocates or co-defendants? They will not be at your Last Judgment.”

Is the active implementation of mistakes against faith an obedience pleasing to God? Without the use of
reason and a return to the Thomistic approach, the provincial fathers in the German monasteries will soon be
blessing homosexual unions—of course, under “the greatest virtue of obedience”!

Let us not be naïve: these devilish novelties will also come to our dioceses, especially to the diocese/city of
Opole, in a few/several years. I do not believe in stopping the march of depravity in the Church in its present
condition.

Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X

The only way out of my situation is to join the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X (FSSPX), where the true
treasures of Tradition and healthy Catholic teaching, invariably proclaimed for the salvation of souls, have
been preserved.

Any other way would be inauthentic and would condemn me once again to conflicts of conscience. This is not
a decision made in a surge of emotions, although such decisions have occurred in the face of the prevailing
modernism and protestantization. It is a decision made after months of research, combined with reading the
papal encyclicals and writings of the Doctors of the Church. My individual studies on the problems of the
Church date back to the beginning of my religious formation and certainly form the basis for this decision.

By acting with full awareness, I am convinced that my only reaction may be to withdraw from the order,
which actively participates in any destructive action directed at the sacrum (sacredness). This is due to the
general clause “the salvation of souls is the highest law”—in this case, also my own soul.

I learned true obedience through the FSSPX, although in the minds of today's post-conciliar priests, the
Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X is considered disobedient, and even treated as a synonym of disobedience. It
turned out, however, that it is the Fraternity that properly understands and fulfills this virtue.

I also understood why Thomism is so strongly removed from spiritual seminaries. Pius X saw a characteristic
sign of modernism in the fight against Thomism; probably, the removal of Thomism was to serve the purpose
of introducing unreflective obedience in the Church, completely detached from the overarching goal of the
Church, that is, the work of salvation of souls.

The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X spoke aloud what I felt in my heart for almost my whole life. Humility
and wisdom: a clear Thomistic—that is, realistic—approach to problems. Archbishop Lefebvre does not need
a special apologia today, because his works defend themselves by producing fruit. Anyone who can go beyond
the collection of circulating negative and unfair slogans will notice it without any problem.

The Archbishop’s fears about the effects of the Council resolutions become more and more justified over the
years. After all, “time is a measure of truth.”

The very fact that bishops create diocesan pastoral ministries of Tradition, saving themselves from the
outflow of the most pious believers to the chapels of the FSSPX, is another proof of God's origin of this work.

Communion in the hand

As a result of the publication of private e-mail correspondence by people who were not its addressees, I was
subjected to pressure (rather blackmail) shortly before the first Mass in which I refused communion in the
hand to the ultra-modern assembly of nuns. Surely, this was the moment when I realized that the province
and I started to drift apart—not for personal reasons, but because of the extremely different approach to the
most important matter that can be held by priestly hands, i.e., the Blessed Sacrament.

I regret that I did not know the FSSPX at that time. It certainly would have hastened my decision and spared
the remorse to which I condemned myself by accepting obedience.

I am not going to attack any of the fathers or brothers, because they are victims of innocent ignorance.
Nevertheless, I believe that every priest should have constant reflection on the state of the Church, on the
supernatural goal to which the Church is to lead. The awakening or quenching of belief in the presence of the
Lord Jesus in the Eucharist should be the subject of the highest concern for every presbyter (priest).

After moving to the parish, in the environment of confreres who did not see the problem, I had a choice: to
accept the notorious rape of my conscience, or to say “no” and join the community of unbreakable priests,
because I consider priests of the Catholic Tradition to be such. Of course, this decision had to mature in me for
some time before moving on to the implementation stage. In the light of the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas,
as well as the judgment of the mind and the voice of conscience, I can by no means agree to act in accordance
with the sentence “think what you will, but you are to obey the regulations.”

What could be of value in such an understanding of obedience? How is this “virtue of obedience” to
correspond with theological virtues if it obviously kills the virtue of faith? It is an insult to reason to not see
the servitude of obedience to faith, hope and charity/love. Can it at all be a virtue to accept being a free
instrument in the hands of a hierarchy that is clearly already departing from the Catholic faith?

From the spiritual point of view, the situation is clear. The Polish Episcopate, by encouraging the faithful to
communion in the hand, implements the guidelines of Martin Bucer, a disciple of Luther, formulating in the
16th century the rules for departing from the belief in the real presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.
This fact alone should prompt priests to refuse to take part in these practices, citing conscience and general
clauses of the canon law. Justifying the promotion of communion in the hand with the epidemiological threat
associated with COVID-19 is, to put it mildly, an insult to reason. This has been clearly and repeatedly
demonstrated by the medical community.

There is no point in citing the history of the practice of communion in the hand, although it seems that the
modernists have already written their version of this story, which omits the most important abuses and
threats to the Catholic faith.
Therefore, for those who take the trouble to understand the situation, it quickly becomes clear that this is
how Satan works in the Church. How else can we call the situation in churches of people who de facto do not
distinguish the Body of the Lord from the Christmas wafer? [Translator's note: Before the Christmas
celebration starts on Christmas Eve, Polish families exchange opłatek, the Christmas wafer, between each
member of the family and offer blessings and good wishes.]

From the beginning of my life in the Order, with the clear guidance of the Blessed Virgin, I was able to observe
this practice. I witnessed it for the first time at the field Mass in Trzebnica in a group of pilgrims from
Germany. What struck me hard was the lack of any shadow of adoration: after ingestion, they immediately
began to joke with each other. I understood that I need to take a closer look at this phenomenon, because it
was clearly associated with the lack of awareness of the greatness of the One who is received in communion.
Subsequent observations did not differ much from the former, and I do not entirely blame those people to
whom it was presented as appropriate and worthy.

A bit of statistics:

“In the United States, 20 years after the introduction of this disgraceful custom, about 70% of Catholics no
longer believed in the Real Presence of the Savior in the Eucharist.”

From the pastoral point of view, I was a witness and participant in saving visible particles from the hands of
the communicated; I saw people in front of the priest, shaking the remnants of the Body of the Lord onto the
church floor, not to mention the notorious clumsiness of movements and disrespectful handling of the Body
of the Lord.

“My Most Holy Son sees himself thrown to the ground and trampled by impure feet” – revelation of Our Lady
in Quito.

And this will not be altered by desperate and erroneous attempts to justify this practice in patristics. Besides,
it was already condemned as a mistake of archaeology by Pius XII.

For years, during the seminary, I was silencing my conscience by telling myself: “What can I do as a cleric and
a friar? All I can do is to stay faithful.” But today, as a presbyter, I see that this cannot be—that by remaining
silent, I am a tool for introducing desecration and desacralization in the Church. We have nothing more
precious in this world than the Body of the Lord!

The voice of St. Francis

We are not able to imitate St. Francis in everything, but we certainly can and must in honor of the Blessed
Sacrament. How much reassurance the Letter to the Entire Order always gave me, especially these fragments:

My priest brothers, remember what is written in the law of Moses: whoever committed a transgression against
even externals died without mercy by a decree of the Lord. How much greater and more severe will the
punishment be of the one who tramples on the Son of God, and who treats the Blood of the Covenant in which he
was sanctified as unclean and who insults the Spirit of grace? For a person looks down upon, defiles and tramples
upon the Lamb of God when, as the Apostle says, not distinguishing and discerning the holy bread of Christ from
other foods or actions, he either unworthily or, even if he is worthy, eats It in vain and unworthily since the Lord
says through the prophet: The person is cursed who does the work of the Lord deceitfully. He will, in truth,
condemn priests who do not wish to take this to heart, saying: I will curse your blessings. (…) how holy, just and
fitting must be he who touches with his hands, receives in his heart and mouth, and offers to others to be received
the One Who is not about to die but Who is to conquer and be glorified, upon Whom the angels longed to gaze.

For a long time, I believed that this passage must protect the community from communion in the hand since it
is not necessary to refer to the great exegesis in order to understand the views of St. Francis on this matter. Of
course, in the poor man’s mind, there was perhaps not even a fear that the hierarchy itself would order to do
so with the Bread from Heaven. This is a huge blow to the salvation of souls, if priests do not care about
believing in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist.

Novus Ordo Missae and the Mass of All Time

The promotion of communion in the hand is not the only reason for my decision; it is more a tip of the
iceberg. The real illness is the intrusive protestantization of the Church, stripping the priesthood of its
uniqueness.

This situation might have been changed through motu proprio Summorum pontificum, but it was completely
ignored in our province, despite it being the clear will of Benedict XVI to return to the celebration of Mass of
St. Pius V.

I remember from the seminary that, in one of the lectures, from the very beginning, it was necessary to fit into
the lecturer's view about the unworthiness, redundancy, and harmfulness of “groups of integrators” in the
Church, which well illustrates the general trend among priests of the province.

I myself spent a lot of time learning to celebrate the Mass of all time—which, deep in my heart I always
wanted to celebrate, bearing in mind the inexpressible feeling of sacrum that I remembered from
participating in it when I was still a lay person. It was my great joy. Today, however, I am doomed to celebrate
it either alone in secret, avoiding awkward questions, or for a very small group of friends who share my
conviction in the perfection and greatness of this rite.

I desire to fully celebrate only the Mass of all time, which is a completely different spiritual reality than the
Novus Ordo Missae; only someone who celebrates both rites will understand the dissonance. The whole “Brief
critical analysis” of Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci becomes fully understandable and obvious, and the
intentions of the creators of the new mass best summarizes: “All these changes are nothing more than a
provocative emphasis of the silent rejection of belief in the dogma of the real presence.”

The difference between such promoted concelebration and the celebration of the Mass of all time is a real
shock. You can see how deprived of the gestures of adoration is this whole Novus Ordo Missae, how many
prayers in the new rite of the mass have been removed, how the reversal of the altar affects the sense of
sacrum. The words of Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci become clear: “The new liturgy will be very pleasing for
all groups standing on the edge of apostasy, which are ravaging the Church, poisoning its body and attacking
doctrinal, liturgical, moral and disciplinary unity, in the midst of a spiritual crisis unprecedented in history.”

It is really sad to see the involvement of young priests, full of good intentions, in the protestant attempts of
winning over the youth, to make the Church nice and fun. It's not like someone is looking for attractions in the
Church, since they have them in the world. Sacrum is what we are looking for in the Church, and that is the
essence of humans being capax Dei – open to God. Thanks to the fact that a person has a soul and that he
wants to know and love God, he can move to a higher level of life in grace. Only the Mass of all time allows to
fully imbue with God and authentically direct one’s life to God.

Second Vatican Council

My seminary education had two directions. On my own I was reaching out for studies about the history of the
Church and positions of traditionalists, to discover the truth. The famous textbook on the history of the
Church by Fr. Kumor, for example, with two sentences, disposes the essence of the problem that occurred at
the Second Vatican Council.

The Council was not called to instill in the Church slogans from the French Revolution and all the previously
condemned mistakes, but to refine the 5th Marian dogma and oppose communism. It was an authentic
inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
What is the competence of those who are so eager to speak, assessing the attitude of Archbishop Marcel
Lefebvre? The opinions I heard during lectures were usually not supported by any substantive arguments.
One may ask, what is the state of general knowledge among the clergy regarding the course of the Second
Vatican Council? Does the common priest know what happened then and what behind-the-scenes gameplay
took place during that time?

How relevant the words of Saint Pius X of Pascendi Dominici gregis turned out to be:

“(…) the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies; they lie hid, a thing to
be deeply deplored and feared, in her very bosom and heart, and are the more mischievous, the less
conspicuously they appear.”

How inconsistent were the attempts to deny the controversy and harmfulness of the Council documents I
heard. In one class, the lecturer tried to convince us that accusing the Council was a false lead—and then, in
another lecture, cited the concept of Rahner’s “anonymous Christian” as a source of destruction of the
missionary spirit.

The problems of the Church consist of a few big mistakes—and hundreds of additional small ones—which the
Council only opened the door to … the rest was completed by the enemies of the Church in practice. The tragic
divergence of the dogmatic and pastoral paths is a characteristic sign of today's times and a sign of weakness.

Let this schizophrenia be described by the words of one of the professors of WSD Antonianum [Translator's
note: a higher theological seminary in Wroclaw, Poland] about the service with the “lady pastor”: “I did
exactly what I taught not to do.”

The church did not begin at the Second Vatican Council, and the popes warned us against such deviations
before. Everything was described by the encyclical Mirari vos:

“The universal church is disgusted with every new thing (...) nothing of the things appointed ought to be
diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and
meaning.”

It is difficult to understand people who, knowing these and similar contents, do not take a critical approach to
what is happening in the Church. Although awareness of the harmfulness of the Second Vatican Council is
increasing among the clergy, open questioning and calling this event evil and the failure of the Church, results
in being shunned in the structures of this Church. The delicate criticism of the Second Vatican Council, which
a clergyman can afford without having sanctions, only allows stating that there is a possibility of
“inappropriate interpretation of the council.” However, it always has to come with full and enthusiastic
appreciation of the idea of renewal, allegedly guiding the council fathers, and emphasizing the illusory
hermeneutics of continuity with earlier decisions of the Church.

In one of the lectures from the Introduction to Theology, the Venerable Provincial Father [Tomasz Brzyski]
touched upon the thread of the masonic list of John Paul I. What a ray of hope in my heart it was. I thought “he
knows” … but what follows? Does the very fact of knowledge exempt us from reflection on the activities
within the Church of these unfortunate hierarchs who are in league with evil?

The voice of the Blessed Mother

In order to preserve the appearances of Marianism in the Order, the so-called apparitions in Medjugorje are
promoted. Although their deceptive character was clearly shown at the beginning of the message, when Gospa
states that: “All religions are equal, and salvation can be achieved through every religion.” [Translator's note:
Seers often refer to the apparition as the Gospa, which is a Croatian archaism for “lady.”]
However, no one admonishes priests who write books about this deceptive phenomenon or organize
pilgrimages. Perhaps this is why the revelations recognized by the Church, and their shocking content that
perfectly reflects the situation present in the Church, are disappearing from our eyes.

I was very impressed by the words of the Blessed Mother of Quito:

“After infiltration in all social strata, masonic sects will spread their mistakes in families with great cunning.
(…) there will be holy ministers of the altar, hidden and beautiful souls in whom my Most Holy Son and I will
take delight, with the exquisite flowers and fruits of heroic sanctity. Against these ministers, impiety will
wage a cruel war and fill them with vituperations, calumnies, and vexations to impede the fulfillment of their
ministry (...)”

“Pray insistently, (...) that for the love of the Eucharistic Heart of my Most Holy Son, for this Precious Blood
poured out with so much generosity, and for the profound bitterness and sorrows of His bitter passion and
death, that he be compassionate to his ministers and put an end as soon as possible to these so ill-fated times,
sending to this Church the Prelate who must restore the spirit of Her priests.”

These are, of course, private revelations, not necessary for salvation—but they are thought-provoking, forcing
you to ask yourself: who could it be?

The Order
When I joined the community, I certainly idealized priests and consecrated people. This does not change the
fact that I have met many great religious brothers, especially those who are not priests, who have truly set a
model of virtue, commitment, and brotherhood for me. Many noble lecturers and formators [formator: one
who trains novices and seminarians] will also remain in my kind memory. I am saddened when thinking of
parting with them, but I cannot put brotherly relations, even the closest ones, on an equal footing with
priestly duties.

When I made the perpetual vows, it was obvious to me that they were not vows in the sense of absolute
behavior, excluding the use of reason. It was obvious and logical to me that the most important thing in
everything was the sentence ending the Code of Canon Law. I must choose to carry out the priesthood in the
spirit of Tradition at the expense of seemingly breaking the vows, although there was no choice, because
these are two different types of graces.

I had to ask myself whether being in the Order would surely guarantee me the eternal life promised at the
eternal vows? I doubt it!

Padre Pio, the great mystic of our time, said after hearing about the council aggiornamento at Capuchins: “St.
Francis will not recognize his sons”—and yet, he did not know to what extent the reforms would evolve.

It is phariseeism to believe that belonging to the Franciscan Order, which is destroying the legacy of its
founder, will automatically guarantee my salvation.

I do not believe that I am the only one

Many of us looked with a critical eye at the behavior of a certain bishop commissioning an ad hoc ecumenical
service with, among others. a woman dressed in bishop's robes. We read with astonishment the statements of
a certain archbishop, highly respected in the province, in which he preached views contrary to the Catholic
teachings, whose thoughtless ecumenism insulting the Catholic Church is legendary.

How many times, in the privacy of monastic halls, when we hear about the ideas and actions of individual
bishops, we see their lack of faith and morbid attempts to not get in trouble with the public opinion, extreme
modernism, and ecumenism with Protestants that identifies them as someone equal to the Apostolic Church.
How many times have we been told not to get offended when, in international religious forums, we encounter
homosexual behavior, that is, friars seeking opportunities for sins calling for vengeance in heaven.
Regardless, the biggest problem for so many are those who want to return to Tradition as a remedy for all
these theological and moral offenses.

We see the symptoms of the disease, and many respond appropriately to them, but we are still afraid to make
a diagnosis. Evil feeds primarily on the inaction of the righteous.

I’m not giving myself any characteristics of special holiness, because I know well that in the seminary I met
fellow brothers with much greater humility, asceticism, and piety than mine. Although I am undeserving, I
was the one who received the grace to discover the true Tradition; and in the face of this fact, I cannot and do
not want to remain indifferent. Leaving is certainly the most difficult decision in my life, much more difficult
than joining the Order or accepting priestly ordination, but it is certainly still the fruit of the same grace of
calling and serving Christ in His Church.

The certainty in my actions is given to me by the extraordinary reassurance I feel from the Blessed Mother.
From her comes the strength and ability for me, with my easy-going character, to enter the road that is so
difficult.

Almost a year in the “covid pastoral ministry” was not lost time. I met many wonderful people who accurately
assessed the ecclesial situation.

I thank God for all the wonderful souls that the Lord has placed in my path, which I could serve with the
sacrament of reconciliation and guidance.

It pains me that I will be considered a traitor in the Order, someone who has abandoned obedience, but I must
bear this price so that I no longer remain in the state of frustration and constant crisis in which I find myself. I
do not take offense at the province, nor seek private gain and freedom from my superiors, as some may think.
But I emphasize the fact that my departure is not taking me to a different diocese or another province or
order. In fact, this would be no change except to change the environment and free oneself from personal
relationships or ties of precedence. I would still be under the pressure of the modernist hierarchs and all
things that should awaken the resistance of the priest.

Leaving is a decision that saves my vocation. Is it possible to do something more tragic than accept the grace
of the ordination and then squander or hide what you have received? After all, we will give an account of
every loss of faith in the Presence of Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament … We will give an account of the
loss of souls who, searching deeply for God and the graces flowing from the Blessed Sacrifice, received only
some show played by a celebrant about God. We will give an account of fidelity to the eternal Catholic
teaching.

I leave many issues untouched, such as: the introduction of demonic cults into the Church in the form of
Pachamama; the reactions of the hierarchs to the organized action of Islamization of Europe under the guise
of the so-called refugees; the absolute relaxation of the doctrine; the “lavender mafia”; and the ennoblement
of Luther on the summits of the Vatican. These issues certainly contribute to my decision.

Today, the only way remaining in faithfulness to Jesus is the way of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, i.e., being
somewhere on the outskirts of the Church, with a clear outline of the problems that torment it, thus
awakening the consciousness of zealous believers. Nevertheless, I am aware that the path of departure to the
FSSPX will not go through a canonically amicable departure.

It is a real obsession of the post-conciliar Church to meet with all sorts of heretics and infidels, to delude the
offenders with the promise of easy salvation, to introduce days of Islam and Judaism, to celebrate the
Reformation, and at the same time combat Catholic Tradition as a source of evil. However, this is not a
problem in a situation where one has lost the ability to say “Yes, yes, no, no.”
The synthetic reflection on the state of the Church and priesthood, as well as pastoral events that I
experienced, brings to mind the analogy with the exceeded critical mass. Therefore, I can no longer serve in
such a church. After putting all the issues together, I understood that I am in a state of higher necessity, in a
state that entitles me to refer to the last canon of the Code of Canon Law: “The salvation of souls, which must
always be the supreme law in the Church, is to be kept before one’s eyes.”

After all, I hope for understanding, or at least a substantive acquaintance, of the above apologia and respect
for my sensitivity and concern for my own salvation. I would like to cite the example of Archbishop Vitus
Hounder, who obtained the consent of the Holy Father Francis to spend his retirement in the priory of the
FSSPX.

To conclude, I will use the words:

“Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may
discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect” (Romans 12:2).

Yours sincerely,

A.M.D.G.

Fr. Cyprian Tomasz Kolendo