Austrian Catholics Lead the Way

A Wayside Crucifix in Austria

The controversy has been raging now for a year. It all began with an anonymous posting on the website of the U.S. District of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) late last November (2020). We faithful were given guidance that allowed, under certain conditions, the acceptance of what have come to be called “abortion-tainted vaccines.” That post was taken down and replaced shortly thereafter with one by the SSPX Secretary General, Fr. Arnaud Sélégny. All over the world, SSPX faithful were incredulous, and in one of the largest Society bastions, Post Falls, Idaho, USA, a “vaccine presentation” was held by the SSPX priests to assure the modest gathering that, in fact. there were indeed circumstances under which we Catholics could acquiesce to the “jab”.

Then, two months ago, Fr. Sélégny penned another opinion piece, in which he urged Catholic faithful to adopt a “practical” stance in response to the COVID19 “vaccines”. It was just too much for loyal Catholics to endure. Letter writing to the SSPX leadership proved fruitless.

Last week, we received a most encouraging email from Mr. Franz Kalwoda of Austria, apprising us of an international effort to respectfully request the SSPX leadership to reject the so-called vaccines and unequivocally strengthen the faithful in their decision for uncompromising good. You may read the document yourself below in its entirety. If you agree, please offer your name as a signatory to Mr. Kalwoda at:


Please provide him with the country where you reside, as well.

There are already names of Catholic faithful from several countries. We are asking our dear readers to join this effort to respectfully ask the SSPX leadership to re-evaluate what so many of their faithful clearly see as obduracy in the face of evidence that these “vaccines” are immorally tested, developed and concocted.

Here is the document originated by our fellow Catholics in Austria:


Brief Critical Comment on the Statement by Fr. Arnaud Sélégny FSSPX dated 24.09.21

The General House of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X published a statement called “Practical considerations for vaccination against Covid-19” by Fr. Arnaud Sélégny on September 24, 2021. This already triggered critical reactions. Criticism of Fr. Sélégny’s overly positive attitude towards the novel vaccination, which many believers find incomprehensible, came, for example, from a layman, Anthony Ambrosetti , from the USA who is affiliated with the Society. As one can hear, he is far from being alone: priests and faithful associated with the SSPX, as well as others, are shocked and scandalized. Some wonder how it can be that the bulwark of the full Catholic faith gives space to relativism here.

Recognition of the activity of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X.

We recognize with the expression of gratitude that since its foundation the Priestly Society has worked beneficially, preserving the full faith, liturgy and morals throughout the apostasy following Vatican II. Above all, we recognize that in some countries afflicted by “lockdowns”, the Society has maintained devotion to God and care for the faithful in an exemplary manner. For this reason, nothing is further from our minds than to join in a denigration of the Society, such as, unfortunately, has recently been carried out by media outlet in the United States.

Identification of a serious shortcoming in the statement in question.

However, out of love for the truth, out of concern for the integrity of the Society, and out of concern for the salvation of souls, Fr. Sélégny’s statement cannot go unchallenged: Even if the Reverend Father deals with the objections that had reached him before September 24, thus showing that he is dealing with the moral problem, and even if he admits that “unknown factors surround the question” and that “pressure is being exerted,” which increase the “difficulties,” the opinion of September 24 is the expression of a profound moral-theological uncertainty. Recall the information guiding all arguments and considerations that the novel COVID vaccine in many cases involves the harvesting of cell lines from aborted children (in development and/or testing). According to insider reports, even viable children are taken alive from the womb and dissected alive, without anesthesia (!). In this respect, the clarity of Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider (“cannibalism”, “beginning of the apocalypse”) must be considered exemplary. Fr. Sélégny’s statement does not adequately portray the appalling sin of abortion, with which the production of vaccines is associated. To put it bluntly, the production and/or testing of the vaccines involves human sacrifice. Moreover, the use of the vaccines has led to so many deaths and other, often very serious, damages in the last eleven months that one must speak of human sacrifices here as well. The citation of Thomas v. Aquinas used by Fr. Sélégny, De malo, q. XIII, a. 4, ad 17, raises serious questions: Is the thought process of the Doctor universalis actually pertinent here? The sensus fidei resists that Thomas should actually be an accomplice in the present tyranny of falsehood. The whole line of thought of Father Sélégny, with all the correct statements it contains, is unfortunately working into the hands of the powers that use the COVID plague for their purposes. It therefore unfortunately also works into the hands of the current Vatican leadership, which has shamelessly made itself an accomplice of the political powers.

Disregarding the obvious: Where is the analysis of circumstances?

The moral-theological analysis of an action traditionally includes three aspects: the object of the action, the intention, and the circumstances. According to our observation, in the vaccination issue, the consideration of the circumstances occurs much too little, even among church officials and, unfortunately, also with Fr. Sélégny. The following should be taken into account: According to the open-hearted statements of Bill Gates and others, virus outbreaks are apparently controllable and are probably being controlled (Gates: “the next virus will get the attention it deserves”, billionaire Warren Buffet: “a new, deadlier wave will come”). Bill Gates also openly stated that he favors population reduction. Vaccination campaigns should also be used for this purpose. On the other hand, he admitted as recently as November 2021, that COVID vaccination had minimal effect in terms of disease prevention (!). At the same time, he spoke ominously of future “bioterrorist attacks”. Here shows the audacity of the propagandist and ruler who is not committed to any truth. All these circumstances surrounding the vaccination must be taken into account for a moral theological analysis.

Where is the discernment of spirits?

The “discernment of spirits” (1 Cor. 12:10, Ignatian Spiritual Exercises) shows us the satanic character of lying propaganda, the murder of unborn children and the simultaneous concealment and denial of abortion in the process, and fear-mongering. In addition, there is an enormous amount of money involved. Where there is mammon, the devil is not far behind. It is an insult to the mind to regard the COVID vaccination campaign as nothing but a medical measure. In view of these facts, it makes no sense to try to interpret away the evil in this matter with moral-theological sophistry.

What would Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre say?

We cannot imagine that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre would have approved of this. After all, we owe it solely to his indomitability that the full Catholic faith was saved in the 20th century. Of course, to this faith belongs the unabridged morality, which in turn includes the absolute prohibition of intrinsece malum, the intrinsically bad act. Only resistance to the evil of the misnamed “vaccination” against COVID can contain further sin and harm and appease the wrath of God. We therefore request that the leadership of the Priestly Society unequivocally strengthen the faithful in their decision for uncompromising good and against the defilement by a lying dictatorship in the name of hygiene.

Vienna, Presentation of Mary, Nov. 21, 2021.


Mag. theol., Mag. phil. Wolfram Schrems (A)

Anthony Ambrosetti (USA)

Victoria Ambrosetti (USA)

Mag. Karl Schlagenhaufen (A)

Patricia McKeever (Scotland)

Dr. med. Johann Wilde (A)

Inge M. Thürkauf (D)

Dr. iur. Georg Roth (A)

Kamil Polakowski (PL)

Hofrat Mag. Thomas Lintner (A)

Mgr. Michal Semin (CZ)

PhDr. Radomír Malý (CZ)

Lucie Cekotová (CZ)

Roman Ďuriš (CZ)

Maria Fellner (A)

Erwin Fellner (A)

Kamil Polakowski (PL)

Jee Soo Susanna Yun (A)

Pia Kim (Kor)

DI Claudia Schneidenbach (D)

Joanna Lee  (Kor)

Hans-Jörg Karrenbrock (A)

Justine Veronika Renner (A)

Walter Froschauer (A)

Hilda Froschauer (A)

DI Christian Schöbel (A)

Mag. Dr. Eleonora Kummer (A)

Helene Kurjata (USA)

Ginger Estrada (USA)

Michael Estrada (USA)

Mary Wood (Australia)

Bridget Schafer (USA)

Richard Raymond (USA) 

Monique Raymond (USA)

Jolanta Makowska (Can)

Jacob McLardy (New Zealand)

Tania McLardy (New Zealand)

Jane Giannattasio (USA)

Daniel Dostie (USA)

Carl Vander Wouden (Can)

Marie Tucker (USA)

Chere Bernhard (USA)

Kenneth N. Jensen (Denmark)

David Hillebrand (USA)

Toni Hillebrand (USA)

Andrew Quernmore (England)

Bill Grijalva (USA)

Melanie Grijalva (USA)

Violet Bagtas (USA)

Patrick Neal Fuller (USA)

Lori Wilson (USA)

Leonorah McGlame (Scotland)

Charles Leipold (USA)

Michael E Fanning (USA)

Patrick DeSantis (NY, USA)

Allen Loyd (California, USA)

Gloria Loyd (California, USA)

Graeme J.A. Taylor (Scotland)

Nigel Dickens (England)

Magdalena Jezierska (Australia)

Martin Blackshaw (Scotland)

Patricia Blackshaw (Scotland)

Kenneth Dewar (Scotland)

Jacqueline Dewar (Scotland)

Sean Dewar (Scotland)

Gemma Dewar (Scotland)

James Blackshaw (Scotland)

Maureen Hendrick (Scotland)

Thomas Hendrick (Scotland)

Bill Pfeiffer (USA)

Leslie Pfeiffer (USA)

Joe Pfeiffer (USA)

Thomas L. Massett (USA)

Patricia Wolfenden (Scotland)

Anthony Wolfenden (Scotland)

Bill Crofut (USA)

Thomas J. Fortino (NY, USA)

Renée Neuville (Wales)

E. Marlies Parker (Wales)

Frances Petty (Scotland)

Frank Payne (USA)

Lori Payne (USA)

Maria Plöb (A)

Anna-Maria Kaufmann (A)

Monika Kaufmann (A)

Irene Pichler (A)

Franz Matthias Pitscheneder (A)

Dr. Michael Ratzenhofer (A)

DI Andreas Kirchmair (A)

Manuela Hirschmugl (A)

Monika Rauch (A)

Michael Koziolek (USA)

Debbie Koziolek (USA)

Samuel Koziolek (USA)

Irene Rutherford (Scotland)

James Trosky (USA)

(Mrs.) Kimberly Riddell (Canada)

DI Alfred Gindl (A)

Marcus Lambert (A)

Michael Fuller (USA)

Sonia Fuller (USA)

Mag. Elisabeth Hillier (England)

Yana Kalwoda (A) 

Franz Kalwoda (A)    Initiator

Ad maiorem Dei gloriam

Selection of sources demonstrating the drama surrounding the issue of “research and production for vaccines from cell lines”:

Here a Pfizer Whistleblower Leaks Execs Emails: ‘We Want to Avoid Having Info on Fetal Cells Out There”

Here is evidence of five babies a week disemboweled for research purposes.

USA: Ethics of Fetal Tissue Research – A Conversation with Tara Sander Lee, molecular and cell biologist unmasks trading and research with fetuses.

From Lifesite News: Dr. Stanley Plotkin is considered the Godfather of Vaccines. He is an American physician who worked as a consultant to the biggest vaccine manufacturers and biotechnology firms, non-profits, and governments. And then, Dr. Plotkin reveals other macabre aspects of the abortion link to vaccines. Not that it should make a difference to pro-lifers, but the children aborted were not disabled babies who were likely to die in the womb anyway. They were not miscarriages either, as is so often presented to assuage the consciences of people conflicted about taking abortion-tainted vaccines. That is just a complete falsehood. He even says that all of them were over three months gestation. If that is not grotesque enough, Dr. Plotkin’s response to harvesting organs from these dozens of babies, who were aborted all after the third month of pregnancy, is even further disturbing. So, they were healthy unborn babies all beyond three months gestation and they had to be three months in utero or older because they needed to have developed the organs these mad scientists were after, organs like their pituitary glands, the unborn children’s lungs, their skin, their kidneys, spleen, hearts and tongues. At a later point in the video, the lawyer asks Dr. Plotkin if he is aware that his client was objecting to the vaccines because what they contain were developed from aborted babies.

Lozier Institute: analysis of Covid vaccination producers.

10 thoughts on “Austrian Catholics Lead the Way

  1. Richard and Monique Raymond


    • Thank you, Richard and Monique, for your comment, but more so for your courage in raising the issue with your priest. It is unfortunate, we think, that some SSPX faithful believe that if they disagree with the Society, they are somehow being disloyal to Archbishop Lefebvre and the missionary order he founded. In fact, it appears that “loyal opposition” is now considered treachery to some. At the very least, we read opinion pieces from some priests like Fr. Robert MacPherson, now relocated to St. Thomas Aquinas seminary in Virginia from the defunct Holy Cross seminary in Australia. Fr. MacPherson, in his last “Southern Sentinel” column before leaving Down Under, apparently wanted all of us who disagree with the Society’s vaccine position to feel a bit guilty for not taking into account all of the great work that the Society has done over the last five decades.
      Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, it is most difficult for us to contradict the SSPX leaders and moral theology professors. Still, the truth is the truth, and there are certainly priests within the SSPX itself who both publicly and privately express chagrin at the moral gymnastics that pro-vaxx Society leaders (like Fr. Selegny) use to twist themselves into Jesuitical sophistry — as Michael Baker has so eloquently pointed out:
      When we met with our prior nearly a year ago, we, too, were basically reminded that we are not theologians, and that we just need to trust what the priests say. But which priests? How about the ones who don’t follow the leader? Fr. Kevin Robinson? Fr. Burfitt? Fr. Frey, District Superior of Austria, who was adamantly and publicly opposed to the deathvaxx before the apparent arm twisting he received from Menzingen. Not to mention the countless good prelates and priests who are not even affiliated with the SSPX. We knew and loved Archbishop Lefebvre, but the truly traitorous thing to do would be for us to remain silent when we see and hear and read of a Society leadership gone awry on this grave issue.
      Thank you again for your comment and your courage. May God bless you and your family. Tony and Vickie Ambrosetti

  2. Thank you!!! How do I sign?

    • Greetings, Bridget,
      You may sign by simply sending your name to Mr. Franz Kalwoda at:
      Thank you so much. May God bless you.

    • God bless you for this brave defence of moral truth in so grave a matter. I have likewise written to the SSPX superiors in Menzingen, as well as to a few District Superiors in various countries, without response. One DS did kindly reply but only to declare his agreement with the Menzingen line, which is so shocking.

      I will gladly sign this petition and pray God that he does not permit what I perceive to be a certain Modernist infiltration into the higher clerical offices of the SSPX. The scandalous approval of this vaccine (under any circumstances) is only the latest in a few worrying manifestations over the past few years, and always with the same response to those faithful who write to Menzingen with their concerns – namely, Silence!

      The SSPX has been the auxiliary flagship of sacred tradition since the Barque of St. Peter was commandeered by Modernist pirates at Vatican II. For almost 60 years she has stood firm in the faith and moral teaching handed down, refusing any and all compromise regardless of persecution. Now it seems that some may be tiring of the fight and using sophistry in argument as a means to appease the Modernist authorities in the Church, whose wrath would otherwise infallibly come upon them.

      This scandalous appeasement position of the SSPX in the matter of the so-called “vaccines” indicates a very serious failing of the moral compass on board the auxiliary flagship. Every Catholic with a true sense of the faith recognises in conscience the very grave danger it represents. It therefore behoves all of us to speak out respectfully but fearlessly, exposing the evil for what it is. We owe this to Almighty God, to Archbishop Lefebvre and to every Catholic soul endangered by such scandalous compromise with so great a moral evil.

  3. Thank you, Tony, I’ve posted the link to this thread this over at Catholic Truth Scotland, and emailed my signature to add to the list.

    Let’s hope this laudable initiative bears the desired fruit.

    God bless you.

  4. Dr. Bernadette Flynn

    “The whole line of thought of Father Sélégny, with all the correct statements it contains, is unfortunately working into the hands of the powers that use the COVID plague for their purposes.”
    This is why I think it’s important that both the SSPX and its critics distinguish between two moral questions: 1) the personal decision of whether to [questionably] benefit from someone else’s evil act and 2) government decisions to mandate vaccines [without medical justification], disregarding human dignity and free will. Fr. Selegny addressed question #1, and “all the correct statements” were made. The “analysis of circumstances” requested in the critical comment relates more to question #2. The question of mandates and the globalist agenda needs to be addressed by the SSPX, so that Fr. Selegny’s response is not misused, and so we can stand united in resisting totalitarianism and avoid division.

    • Dear Dr. Flynn,
      Thank you for taking the time to comment. We must point out, however, that there is no such thing in any teachings of Holy Mother Church as a “personal decision of whether to . . . benefit from someone else’s evil act.” Perhaps you are referring to the different forms of cooperation in evil such as formal/material or remote/proximate. Still, the criteria are quite clear — there is no gray area. The SSPX leadership and their spokesmen have been, since their infamous February 2006 “vaccine issue” of Angelus magazine, trying to convince us that the issue of “abortion-tainted vaccines” is too complex for the simple folk in the pews to understand. You can read about that at:

      The SSPX Doubles Down on the Vaccine

      But it is surprisingly straightforward: we become “partakers” of ill-gotten goods when we accept (or purchase or take) those goods stolen from another. This is the primary objection that any Catholic should have to these shots: all COVID-19 inoculations currently available were all either tested and developed using stem cell tissue/DNA from aborted babies (Pfizer and Moderna), or they contain actual tissue from those aborted babies in their injected serum (Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca). Consequently, no Catholic may, by traditional Church teaching, partake of the ill-gotten goods of these murdered children, as it makes us “partakers” of the fruits of those evil actions. St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Alphonsus Liguori, and countless other theologian saints have given us the foundations that guide us in situations such as these. Furthermore, moral theologian authors such as Father Dominic Prümmer (who authored The Handbook of Moral Theology) was instrumental in compiling compendia on the practical application of moral theology. Prümmer, Koch, and many others, plainly show that we become “accessory to another’s sin” when we partake of another’s ill-gotten goods.
      Fr. Sélégny is stuck in the mindset of “remote vs. proximate” and “formal vs. material”, because he keeps thinking of this in terms of cooperating in the evil of the original murdered babies exploited for HEK-293. But we do not necessarily say that we formally cooperate in the original evil act, for it is indeed in the past. But by acquiescing to these abortion-tainted inoculations, we do in reality become accessory to evil-doers by exploiting stem cells and organs stolen from murdered human beings. Moreover, by accepting immorally developed pharmaceuticals, we contribute to the demand for more “medical research” to be accomplished, now and in the future, using fetal stem cells as well as organs from babies extracted ex utero. Dr. Stanley Plotkin, the “godfather” of vaccines, under sworn testimony in 2018, was forced to admit that the standard procedure for procuring fetal stem cells and organs was (and continues to be) to deliver the child “caesarian,” then butcher the newborn for their body parts, before murdering them.
      This is the point that the SSPX leadership does not seem to be able to understand. We have been trying to explain this to our local priests, to the USA District Superior, as well as to the Secretary General and the Superior General of the Society. The argument is not a difficult one to understand, and we posted it on our blog several months ago:

      Abortion-Tainted Vaccines: Contributing to the Demand

      Let us take the time once again to provide the link to Michael Baker’s thorough analysis from a moral theological standpoint:
      Another excellent source for much food for thought on this issue is a recent article by “Father Ambrose”. It is lengthy, but well worth the time:
      Thank you again for reading and taking the time to comment.

  5. Check out “Vaccine Deaths Com” which lists all the injuries and death concerning this experimental jab.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s