Nothing Changed? : Fr. Patrick Girouard

Admin

Administrator
(Video Below)

Dear readers,

I am glad to be able to share with you a new tool in our fight against the changes in the Society. Indeed, on August 4th, I read from the pulpit, and commented, a letter from Fr. Jean Violette, that virulently condemns the arguments proposed by Bishop Fellay to justify his will to obtain a “reconciliation” of the Society with Conciliar Rome. That letter was written in 2003, and it reflects the official position of the SSPX at the time.

Thus we can say that the Father Violette of 2003 condemned the Bishop Fellay of 2013. I think it will be difficult for the liberals occupying the Society to try to continue to pretend it has not changed, and to say that Bishop Fellay is remaining faithful to Archbishop Lefebvre. You can listen to my sermon and/or read the transcript you will find below the video screen. (Video bottom left corner)

Fr. Jean Violette Condemns Bishop Fellay!

Dear Faithful,

Unfortunately I have sad news to end the year. Some of you may have seen it on the Internet. Indeed Father Aulagnier, one of Archbishop Lefebvre’s first and closest companion in the resistance, assistant to the Superior General, founding district superior of the French district had to be expelled from the Society. Last September we were saddened by the interview of Father Aulagnier to the Wanderer. At first I thought of replying earlier but then decided to wait to see how this affair would end. This interview, along with an extended article published in French on his website as well as in a French daily newspaper proved to be the last straw.

For a long time now, since 1998, he had publicly and virulently opposed the Society’s stand regarding negotiations with Rome. As well he disobeyed our constitutions and repeatedly disobeyed Bishop Fellay’s explicit orders thus giving a bad example. He had also created a very difficult situation within the Society trying to sway its members in pursuing an accord with Rome thus trying to cause division and even rebellion against the legitimate authority. The problem was not that he had contrary opinions but that he was airing them in public and trying to undermine the Superior General and the Society. This state of affairs had lasted long enough. Because it was Father Aulagnier and the respect he commanded in the Society, Bishop Fellay and the General Council were very patient but sometimes, even patience can be a fault.

After reading Father Aulagnier’s interview a few questions come to mind: why grant an interview to a newspaper, which is clearly against the SSPX? Are birds of a feather starting to flock together? Secondly Father Aulagnier seems to imply that those who disagree with his opinion and agree with the Superior General and the majority of SSPX members regarding the so-called reconciliation are “yes men”. This is not only insulting it is ludicrous. On the contrary as we will see, the SSPX’s present stand would seem more faithful to the Archbishop.

Now I have not read Father Aulagnier’s French articles I’ve only read the interview in the Wanderer. According to this article, I think we can summarize Father Aulagnier’s arguments in favor of a “reconciliation” in the following: 1. The danger of schism. 2. His friendship with the “heroic” priests of Campos. 3. “The attitude of Rome is new.” 4. “Additionally I think that there is a danger in seeing this conflict last for ages.” Let us consider these points.

1. The danger of schism.


Our resistance is not rebellion. It is the necessary attitude of Catholics who want to keep the faith when faced with prelates who attack, deny or threaten it. We do not want to become Protestants! We continue to believe in the divinity of Our Lord and His social Kingship, His Church. The fact that we keep the faith and we continue to speak with the Roman authorities shows there is no danger of schism because we still recognize their authority. Dispensations and other ecclesiastical permissions have been sought and received from the Roman authorities. What is in question is not their authority but whether we can trust them or not. It is not just a matter of having a majority in a Roman commission. It is a matter of can we put ourselves under them and trust them to protect our Faith? Unfortunately the present Roman authorities have proven over and over they cannot be trusted, that they have not changed as we will point out later on.

The solution to this crisis will come from Rome when the Roman authorities come back to the integrity of the Faith. But until then we do well to continue our resistance. How long this will
take is not our problem but God’s. But we cannot for the sake of a fake unity join those who promote errors, who reduce the Church to a human institution, or simply one religion among others thus destroying it. So we continue Tradition and continue to denounce those who reject it in the name of a new conciliar church. As Archbishop Lefebvre said: by cutting themselves off from the previous popes, the modern Roman authorities are the ones who are schismatic. When Rome returns to the Faith the only matter for discussion will be who will become a bishop and who will he replace?

2. His friendship with the “heroic” priests of Campos.


Friendship is indeed a noble sentiment. But does it come before one’s duty or before one’s Faith. Further, I simply ask the question: Does it take heroic virtue to capitulate in the fight for Tradition in order to obtain recognition? Did it take heroic virtue to renounce their spiritual father, Bishop de Castro Mayer, to abandon and turn against their former comrades in arms? I don’t think so. Is Father Aulagnier also on the verge of choosing between the pre-Vatican II and the post-Vatican II Archbishop Lefebvre? As if there was a difference.

3. The attitude of Rome is new

This is the most unbelievable reason of all. Where has Father Aulagnier been for the past 5 years? Have the modern Roman authorities really changed? Has he forgotten what they have done to the Fraternity of St Peter, which is their own creation? Has he forgotten about the two sacrilegious prayer meetings of Assisi? The last one took place a week after they granted recognition to the “heroic” priests of Campos who did not say a word about it. By the way, hasn’t he noticed how quiet the “heroic” priests of Campos are since they signed their agreement? Doesn’t he know that on May 24 2003, at the same time as Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos was offering the traditional Mass in St Mary Major, the Pope was giving the Catholic church of Saints Vincent and Anastasius, which contains the embalmed hearts of 22 popes, to the Bulgarian Orthodox to share? Some change!

He seems to have forgotten what Archbishop Lefebvre knew well and denounced: there are two Romes: Catholic Rome and the neo-modernist Rome. As did Archbishop Lefebvre, we adhere with our whole heart to Catholic Rome but reject the neo-modernist Rome. Catholic Rome has been infiltrated and is occupied by Modernists. This is a fact. The proclamation by Cardinal Castrillon that “The old Roman rite thus conserves in the Church its right of citizenship” is nice but changes nothing. It is perfectly in line with the neo-modernist ecumenism of the neo-modernist Romans, which is: Why not accept also the Mass of St Pius V? We accept everything else.

But we are not looking for acceptance. We will not be happy if at the next Assisi prayer meeting Bishop Fellay stands closer to the Pope than the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama shouldn’t even be there. We hope that at the next prayer meeting at Assisi to pray for peace the Pope will be surrounded by all the Catholic bishops consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. This is where the true peace is. Encouraging prayers to false gods will not bring peace.

So the words of Archbishop Lefebvre to John Paul II in 1988 are still valid today: “The time for cooperation has not yet come.” Absolutely nothing has changed. The present Roman authorities continue to be faithful to their principles of the new theology, new ecclesiology new evangelization exemplified by the spirit of Vatican II and Assisi in which they want to draw us and of which we want no part.

The SSPX also continues faithful to the Catholic principles transmitted by the Archbishop. “We do not view reconciliation in the same way. Cardinal Ratzinger see it in the sense of bringing us to Vatican II. We see it as the return of Rome to Tradition. We cannot come together. It is a dialogue between the deaf.” For the renewal of the dialogue with Rome “I will raise the question on the doctrinal level: ‘Are you in agreement with the great encyclicals of all the previous popes? Are you in agreement with Quanta cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei, Libertas of Leo XIII, Pascendi of Pius X, Quas primas of Pius XI, Humani generis of Pius XII? Are you in full communion with these popes and their teaching? Do you still accept the anti-modernist oath? Are you in favor of the social kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ? If you do not accept the doctrine of your predecessors it is useless to talk. As long as you refuse to reform the council in light of the doctrine of these popes who preceded you there is no dialogue possible. It is useless… The opposition between us is not a small thing. It is not sufficient for then to tell us: you can say the old Mass… No the opposition between is not there, it is the doctrine.” 1

4. “I think that there is a danger in seeing this conflict last for ages”.


In my opinion, I think we might see here the real reason for Father Aulagnier’s change. The fight is dragging on. He has been at the center of this fight for over 30 years. Maybe he is tired of the fight! But this is not the first time that a conflict over the faith has lasted for ages. The Arian crisis lasted over 70 years, the papal exile in Avignon 68 years, the great Schism 39 years. Is this a reason to abandon the fight to come to some arrangement? It’s a good thing St Athanasius didn’t get tired of being exiled, threatened, falsely accused, excommunicated etc. He wouldn’t be St Athanasius.

He seems to have forgotten that: “In other times heretics and schismatics left the Church. Today, as St Pius X warned us, they remain to make her evolve from within and to seduce, if it were possible all or part of the flock of the holy bishop… But one does not deal with this kind of enemy all the more so that he is cunning. One does not negotiate with him a false and separate peace. One fights him till the end, strong in his right – Deus vult - God wills it – reminding him of the truths he attacks in vain… Rome knows it made an error, a grave error: the excommunication (against Mgr Lefebvre). How to repair the error? Time will tell. In any case not without a frank return of the hierarchy to the total and integral confession of the catholic faith whole and entire. The day will come when Rome by its conversion will find our serenity.2 Seems like has lost his serenity.

Dear faithful do not lose your serenity, stand calm firm in the unchanging faith of all times. Do not abandon the fight. Sure it is dragging out. But we will win.

As usual we thank you for your continued support and assure you of our daily prayers for you and yours especially during the holy season of Advent and Christmastide. May you all have a happy and blessed Christmas and may the newborn Lord and His holy Mother and St Joseph reward and bless you in the coming year.

With my blessing. Father Jean Violette

1. Fideliter #66 November-December 1988
2. Father Paul Aulagnier Fideliter #65 September-October 1988

*******************************************************************************************************

Fr. Jean Violette Condemns Bishop Fellay! Fr. Girouard’s Sermon of August 4th, 2013 Aldergrove, BC, Canada

The sermon of today is a reading and commentary of a letter someone sent me yesterday. They found it on Cath.Info but you can also find it on the Canadian SSPX District website. If you go on the Canadian website and you go to the "Letters from the District Superiors", there is a category that says, “Letters of the former District Superiors of Canada”, and then you have “Father Violette” and then you have different letters and there is one from Father Violette dated December 2003. And that deals with Father Paul Aulagnier, who was being expelled in the fall of 2003 by Bishop Fellay.

Father Aulagnier was expelled from the Society because he was in favor of an agreement with Rome. So for those who think that the Society has not changed, I will read that letter and you will realize that it's almost as if I would have written it, because Father Violette is using the arguments of the Resistance against an agreement with Rome. And, at the time, there was the same kind of announcement from Bishop Fellay in the Cor Unum. Okay, I was not able, because of lack of time, to get that copy, but you can be sure that what Father Violette says is an expression of the official line of the Society, as being a District Superior. I will read it to you and you will see with amazement that basically we can use that letter in the Resistance now against Bishop Fellay. There has been a complete turnaround, and Father Violette himself now has completely turned around. Father Violette, (actually Prior of Kansas City), is fully with Bishop Fellay. I think I will send him his letter and say, "Remember what you wrote 10 years ago".

So that is a letter to all the Faithful of Canada to warn them against a reconciliation with Rome. It's pretty strong, you will see: (N.B. Fr. Violette’s letter is in capitals, Fr. Girouard’s comments are between parenthesis).

DEAR FAITHFUL, UNFORTUNATELY, I HAVE SAD NEWS TO END THE YEAR. SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ON THE INTERNET. (You will see, ah! ah! that... ah! it is still what they say about us now). INDEED FATHER AULAGNIER, ONE OF ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE'S FIRST AND CLOSEST COMPANION IN THE RESISTANCE, (in the Resistance!) ASSISTANT TO THE SUPERIOR GENERAL, FOUNDING DISTRICT SUPERIOR OF THE FRENCH DISTRICT, HAD TO BE EXPELLED FROM THE SOCIETY. LAST SEPTEMBER WE WERE SADDENED BY THE INTERVIEW OF FATHER AULAGNIER TO THE WANDERER. (The Wanderer is a 'conservative' newspaper in the United States. It was founded by the grand-father of Michael Matt who now has a 'traditional' paper which is The Remnant, and which is not much more traditional than the Wanderer.) AT FIRST I THOUGHT OF REPLYING EARLIER BUT THEN DECIDED TO WAIT TO SEE HOW THIS AFFAIR WOULD END. THIS INTERVIEW, ALONG WITH AN EXTENDED ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN FRENCH ON HIS WEBSITE, AS WELL AS IN A FRENCH DAILY NEWSPAPER PROVED TO BE THE LAST STRAW. (So that reminds me of what they said against Bishop Williamson: he had his website, then his blog, and he held, publicly, opinions contrary to the General Superior, and therefore we had to get rid of him.)

FOR A LONG TIME NOW, SINCE 1998, HE HAD PUBLICLY AND VIRULENTLY OPPOSED THE SOCIETY'S STAND REGARDING

NEGOTIATIONS WITH ROME. (This could be applied... It's the same sentence that they say to Bishop Williamson but for the other reason.) AS WELL HE DISOBEYED OUR CONSTITUTIONS AND REPEATEDLY DISOBEYED BISHOP FELLAY'S

EXPLICIT ORDERS THUS GIVING A BAD EXAMPLE. (Exactly what they said about Bishop Williamson!) HE HAD ALSO CREATED A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION WITHIN THE SOCIETY TRYING TO SWAY ITS MEMBERS (Same thing about Bishop Williamson.) TO SWAY ITS MEMBERS IN PURSUING AN ACCORD WITH ROME (So they blamed Fr. Aulagnier for having advocated an accord with Rome, and for trying to convince other members in the Society.) THUS TRYING TO CAUSE DIVISION AND EVEN REBELLION AGAINST THE LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY. (Exactly what they said about Bishop Williamson, Fr. Pfeiffer, myself, and all that. Exactly the same!) THE PROBLEM WAS NOT THAT HE HAD CONTRARY OPINIONS, BUT THAT HE WAS AIRING THEM IN PUBLIC (Like they told me, like they told Bishop Williamson: You cannot talk about your ideas. You have to remain silent.) AND TRYING TO UNDERMINE THE SUPERIOR GENERAL AND THE SOCIETY. THIS STATE OF AFFAIRS HAS LASTED LONG ENOUGH. BECAUSE IT WAS FATHER AULAGNIER AND THE RESPECT HE COMMANDED IN THE SOCIETY, BISHOP FELLAY AND THE GENERAL COUNCIL WERE VERY PATIENT, BUT SOMETIMES, PATIENCE CAN BE A FAULT. (Exactly what they said about Bishop Williamson.)

AFTER READING FATHER AULAGNIER'S INTERVIEW A FEW QUESTIONS COME TO MIND: WHY GRANT AN INTERVIEW TO A NEWSPAPER, WHICH IS CLEARLY AGAINST THE SSPX? ARE BIRDS OF A FEATHER STARTING TO FLOCK TOGETHER?

SECONDLY, FATHER AULAGNIER SEEMS TO IMPLY THAT THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH HIS OPINION AND AGREE WITH THE SUPERIOR GENERAL AND THE MAJORITY OF SSPX MEMBERS REGARDING THE SO-CALLED RECONCILIATION ARE “YES MEN”. THIS IS NOT ONLY INSULTING IT IS LUDICROUS. ON THE CONTRARY, AS WE WILL SEE, THE SSPX'S PRESENT STAND WOULD SEEM MORE FAITHFUL TO THE ARCHBISHOP. (In those days, the stand was against negotiation / reconciliation. And he says that this stand against it, is more faithful to the Archbishop. This is exactly what we have all been saying for so long!)

NOW I HAVE NOT READ FATHER AULAGNIER'S FRENCH ARTICLES I'VE ONLY READ THE INTERVIEW IN THE WANDERER.

ACCORDING TO THIS ARTICLE, I THINK WE CAN SUMMARIZE FATHER AULAGNIER'S ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF A "RECONCILIATION" IN THE FOLLOWING: (And now you will see that the arguments of Father Aulagnier which are now condemned, which at that time, 10 years ago, were condemned by the SSPX and Father Violette, are the same arguments now used by Bishop Fellay. So if this is not a change, I wonder what it is! Summary of the arguments:

THE DANGER OF SCHISM. (This was the big argument of Bishop Fellay against Bishop Williamson and the two other bishops last year.) 2. HIS FRIENDSHIP WITH THE "HEROIC" PRIESTS OF CAMPOS. (Well, that's different.) 3. THE ATTITUDE OF ROME IS NEW. ("The attitude of Rome has changed, it is more traditional now." Exactly what we hear now from Bishop Fellay!) 4. ADDITIONALLY I THINK THAT THERE IS DANGER IN SEEING THIS CONFLICT LAST FOR AGES. (That's one of their arguments too: "We cannot wait for the conversion of Rome. It will never happen. We have to be realistic!" That's what they tell us: "So we have to deal with them now, and later, once we are back in the structure, we can change them, but we should not expect the change before to go." This is exactly what Father Aulagnier says. Now, Fr. Violette will be answering Fr. Aulagnier’s four arguments in favour of a “reconciliation” with Modernist Rome...)

1. THE DANGER OF SCHISM:


OUR RESISTANCE IS NOT REBELLION. (That is exactly what we say too, now, the Resistance.) IT IS THE NECESSARY ATTITUDE OF CATHOLICS WHO WANT TO KEEP THE FAITH WHEN FACED WITH PRELATES WHO ATTACK, DENY OR THREATEN IT. WE DO NOT WANT TO BECOME PROTESTANTS! WE CONTINUE TO BELIEVE IN THE DIVINITY OF OUR LORD AND HIS SOCIAL KINGSHIP, HIS CHURCH. THE FACT THAT WE KEEP THE FAITH AND WE CONTINUE TO SPEAK WITH THE ROMAN AUTHORITIES SHOWS THERE IS NO DANGER OF SCHISM BECAUSE WE STILL RECOGNIZE THEIR AUTHORITY.

(We do recognize their authority.) DISPENSATIONS AND OTHER ECCLESIASTICAL PERMISSIONS HAVE BEEN SOUGHT AND RECEIVED FROM THE ROMAN AUTHORITIES. WHAT IS IN QUESTION IS NOT THEIR AUTHORITY, BUT WHETHER WE CAN TRUST THEM OR NOT. (We know they are the authority, but we cannot trust them.) IT IS NOT JUST A MATTTER OF HAVING A MAJORITY IN A ROMAN COMMISSION. IT IS A MATTER OF CAN WE PUT OURSELVES UNDER THEM?

(Can we put ourselves under them? We say 'no' and at the time they said 'no' as well!) CAN WE TRUST THEM TO PROTECT OUR FAITH? UNFORTUNATELY, THE PRESENT ROMAN AUTHORITIES HAVE PROVEN OVER AND OVER THEY CANNOT BE TRUSTED, AND THAT THEY HAVE NOT CHANGED, AS WE WILL POINT OUT LATER ON. (We should send that letter to Bishop Fellay!)

THE SOLUTION TO THIS CRISIS WILL COME FROM ROME WHEN THE ROMAN AUTHORITIES COME BACK TO THE INTEGRITY OF THE FAITH. (When they come back, not when we go back to them! When THEY come back!) BUT UNTIL THEN WE DO WELL TO CONTINUE OUR RESISTANCE. HOW LONG THIS WILL LAST IS NOT OUR PROBLEM BUT GOD'S.

BUT WE CANNOT FOR THE SAKE OF A FAKE UNITY JOIN THOSE WHO PROMOTE ERRORS, (We cannot join them.) AND THOSE WHO REDUCE THE CHURCH TO A HUMAN INSTITUTION, OR SIMPLY ONE RELIGION AMONG OTHERS, THUS DESTROYING IT. SO WE CONTINUE TRADITION AND CONTINUE TO DENOUNCE THOSE WHO REJECT IT IN THE NAME OF A NEW CONCILIAR CHURCH. (Now, in the Neo-SSPX, they say there is no such thing as a Conciliar Church. Go to DICI. It is only a "tendency". It's not really a Conciliar Church.) AS ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE SAID: “BY CUTTING THEMSELVES OFF FROM THE PREVIOUS POPES, THE MODERN ROMAN AUTHORITIES ARE THE ONES WHO ARE SCHISMATIC.” (It is exactly what I told you last year, and here we have Father Violette 10 years ago.) WHEN ROME RETURNS TO THE FAITH THE ONLY MATTER FOR DISCUSSION WILL BE WHO WILL BECOME A BISHOP AND WHO WILL HE REPLACE? (Those are details. When Rome goes back to the Faith there will be no problem. When they go back to the true Catholic Church, there will be no problem. That always was our position. Conversion of Rome first! That's what it means.)

2. THE FRIENDSHIP OF FATHER AULAGNIER WITH THE "HEROIC" PRIESTS OF CAMPOS:

FRIENDSHIP IS INDEED A NOBLE SENTIMENT. BUT DOES IT COME BEFORE ONE'S DUTY OR BEFORE ONE'S FAITH? (The duty has to be first, Faith has to be first! We may lose friends, we may lose family members, but we have to follow our conscience; we want to save our souls.) DOES IT TAKE HEROIC VIRTUE TO CAPITULATE IN THE FIGHT FOR TRADITION, IN ORDER TO OBTAIN RECOGNITION? (I repeat DOES IT TAKE HEROIC VIRTUE TO CAPITULATE IN THE FIGHT FOR TRADITION, IN ORDER TO OBTAIN RECONCILIATION? (This is the question we have to ask Bishop Fellay, NOW!) DID IT TAKE HEROIC VIRTUE TO RENOUNCE THEIR SPIRITUAL FATHER, BISHOP DE CASTRO MAYER, AND TO ABANDON AND TURN AGAINST THEIR FORMER COMRADES IN ARMS? I DON'T THINK SO. IS FATHER AULAGNIER ALSO ON THE VERGE OF CHOOSING BETWEEN THE PRE-VATICAN II AND THE POST-VATICAN II ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE? AS IF THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE.

3. THE ATTITUDE OF ROME IS NEW!


(This is what they tell us now: "Rome has changed.") THIS IS THE MOST UNBELIEVABLE REASON OF ALL, (my emphasis here) WHERE HAS FATHER AULAGNIER BEEN FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS? HAVE THE MODERN ROMAN AUTHORITIES REALLY CHANGED? HAS HE FORGOTTEN WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO THE FRATERNITY OF ST. PETER, WHICH IS THEIR OWN CREATION? HAS HE FORGOTTEN ABOUT THE TWO SACRILEGIOUS PRAYER MEETINGS IN ASSISI? (Ah! Ah! We say the same thing to Bishop Fellay now, it's incredible!) THE LAST ONE TOOK PLACE A WEEK AFTER THEY GRANTED RECOGNITION TO THE 'HEROIC' PRIESTS OF CAMPOS, WHO DID NOT SAY A WORD AGAINST IT. (What did the Neo-SSPX say against Assisi III? Go back and look - - nothing!) BY THE WAY HASN'T HE NOTICED HOW QUIET THE 'HEROIC' PRIESTS OF CAMPOS ARE, SINCE THEY SIGNED THEIR AGREEMENT? (Ah! Ah!) DOESN'T HE KNOW THAT ON MAY 24, 2003, AT THE SAME TIME AS CARDINAL CASTRILLON HOYOS WAS OFFERING THE TRADITIONAL MASS IN ST. MARY MAJOR, THE POPE WAS GIVING THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OF SAINTS VINCENT AND ANASTASIUS, WHICH CONTAINS THE EMBALMED HEARTS OF 22 POPES, TO THE BULGARIAN ORTHODOX TO SHARE? SOME CHANGE! (So Cardinal Hoyos says the Latin Mass in Rome, and on the same day the Pope gives a traditional church to the orthodox schismatics, to share with Roman Catholics.)

HE SEEMS TO HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE KNEW WELL AND DENOUNCED: THERE ARE TWO ROMES: CATHOLIC ROME AND THE NEO-MODERNIST ROME. AS DID ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE, WE ADHERE WITH OUR WHOLE HEART TO CATHOLIC ROME, BUT WE REJECT THE NEO-MODERNIST ROME. CATHOLIC ROME HAS BEEN INFILTRATED AND IS OCCUPIED BY MODERNISTS. THIS IS A FACT. THE PROCLAMATION BY CARDINAL HOYOS THAT

"THE OLD ROMAN RITE THUS CONSERVES IN THE CHURCH ITS RIGHT OF CITIZENSHIP" IS NICE BUT CHANGES NOTHING.

(Same thing we say of the 2007 Motu Propio - It is nice , in a way, but changes nothing... and it's not truly nice, the Motu Propio, but anyway...) IT IS PERFECTLY IN LINE WITH THE NEO-MODERNIST ECUMENISM OF THE NEO-MODERNIST ROMANS, WHICH IS: WHY NOT ACCEPT THE MASS OF ST. PIUS V? WE ACCEPT EVERYTHING ELSE. (That's the real modernist thinking. We accept the Buddhist, we accept the Moslem. We might accept as well the Latin mass. But that doesn't change the fact that they are remaining modernists!)

BUT WE ARE NOT LOOKING FOR ACCEPTANCE. WE WILL NOT BE HAPPY IF AT THE NEXT ASSISI PRAYER MEETING BISHOP FELLAY STANDS CLOSER TO THE POPE THAN THE DALAI LAMA. (Because this is one of the things that will happen. If we are recognized, they will send an invitation to Bishop Fellay to go to these things. And he could not say "no" to the Pope, because he will belong to the Pope. He will HAVE to be there. Like Bishop Rifan in Campos, a couple of years after his recognition by Rome. He was invited to go to a big celebration with all the bishops of the Diocese... of that province of South America there, where there was a great shameful circus in the procession, with women half naked and all that, and he was there. You can see him on the Internet, participating at that Novus Ordo shameful ceremony, because you cannot say "no". Once you are back, you cannot say "no", because you don't want to lose what they gave you. And Father, Dom Gerard, who had received from Rome the promise that he will be allowed to continue the fight against modernism; five years after having signed, he concelebrated the New Mass with Pope John Paul II in Rome. Of course! Of course! And now you go to... Somebody sent me a copy on the Internet, of a leaflet of the bookstore and church store that they have in Le Barroux, the monastery of Dom Gerard, and they are selling statues of John Paul II! That's why Rome wants us back, because they know they will win in the long run.) THE DALAI LAMA SHOULDN’T EVEN BE THERE. WE HOPE THAT AT THE NEXT PRAYER MEETING AT ASSISI TO PRAY FOR PEACE THE POPE WILL BE SURROUNDED BY ALL THE CATHOLIC BISHOPS CONSECRATING RUSSIA (That should be the real prayer at Assisi, not with all the religions, only with all the Catholic bishops, and to consecrate Russia to the Blessed Virgin Mary, that's what should be.) THIS IS WHERE THE TRUE PEACE IS. ENCOURAGING PRAYERS TO FALSE GODS WILL NOT BRING PEACE.

SO THE WORDS OF ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE TO JOHN PAUL II IN 1988 ARE STILL VALID TODAY: "THE TIME FOR COOPERATION HAS NOT YET COME." (This is Father Violette's letter! This is the whole condemnation of their attitude today; this is a new proof of the change in the Society!) IN ROME ABSOLUTELY NOTHING HAS CHANGED. THE PRESENT ROMAN AUTHORITIES CONTINUE TO BE FAITHFUL TO THEIR PRINCIPLES OF THE NEW THEOLOGY, THEIR NEW ECCLESIOLOGY, THEIR NEW EVANGELIZATION, EXEMPLIFIED BY THE SPIRIT OF VATICAN II AND ASSISI IN WHICH THEY WANT TO DRAW US AND OF WHICH WE WANT NO PART.

THE SSPX ALSO CONTINUES FAITHFUL TO THE CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES TRANSMITTED BY THE ARCHBISHOP: "WE DO NOT VIEW RECONCILIATION IN THE SAME WAY. CARDINAL RATZINGER SEES IT IN THE SENSE OF BRINGING US TO VATICAN II.

WE SEE IT AS A RETURN OF ROME TO TRADITION. WE CANNOT COME TOGETHER. IT IS A DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE DEAF". (And here is a quote from the Archbishop about the renewal of the dialogue with Rome :"I WILL RAISE THE QUESTION ON THE DOCTRINAL LEVEL: 'ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH THE GREAT ENCYCLICALS OF ALL THE PREVIOUS POPES? ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH QUANTA CURA OF PIUS IX, IMMORTALE DEI, LIBERTAS, OF LEO XIII, PASCENDI OF PIUS X, QUAS PRIMAS OF PIUS XI, HUMANI GENERIS OF PIUS XII? ARE YOU IN FULL COMMUNION WITH THESE POPES AND THEIR TEACHING? DO YOU STILL ACCEPT THE ANTI-MODERNIST OATH? ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF THE SOCIAL KINGSHIP OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST? IF YOU DO NOT ACCEPT THE DOCTRINE OF YOUR PREDECESSORS IT IS USELESS TO TALK.” (That's our Archbishop!) “AS LONG AS YOU REFUSE TO REFORM THE COUNCIL IN LIGHT OF THE DOCTRINE OF THESE POPES WHO PRECEDED YOU THERE IS NO DIALOGUE POSSIBLE. IT IS USELESS... THE OPPOSITION BETWEEN US IS NOT A SMALL THING. IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR THEM TO TELL US: ‘YOU CAN SAY THE OLD MASS’... NO, THE OPPOSITION BETWEEN US IS NOT IN THE LITURGY, IT IS IN THE DOCTRINE.” (Those were quotes from Archbishop Lefebvre in an interview published in December 1988 in Fideliter # 66.)

(Now, the final answer to the last argument of Father Aulagnier, where he says:

4. "I THINK THAT THERE IS A DANGER IN SEEING THIS CONFLICT LAST FOR AGES".


IN MY OPINION I THINK WE MIGHT SEE HERE THE REAL REASON FOR FATHER AULAGNIER'S CHANGE. THE FIGHT IS DRAGGING ON. HE HAS BEEN AT THE CENTER OF THIS FIGHT FOR OVER 30 YEARS. MAYBE HE IS TIRED OF THE FIGHT!

(We could say the same about Bishop Fellay!) BUT THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT A CONFLICT OVER THE FAITH HAS

LASTED FOR AGES. THE ARIAN CRISIS LASTED OVER 70 YEARS, THE PAPAL EXILE IN AVIGNON 68 YEARS, THE GREAT SCHISM 39 YEARS. IS THIS A REASON TO ABANDON THE FIGHT? TO COME TO SOME ARRANGEMENT? IT'S A GOOD THING ST.ATHANASIUS DIDN'T GET TIRED OF BEING EXILED, THREATENED, FALSELY ACCUSED, EXCOMMUNICATED ETC.

BECAUSE HE WOULDN'T BE ST. ATHANASIUS.

HE SEEMS TO HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT: (The following is an older quote from Father Aulagnier, from Fideliter # 65, Sept-Oct. 1988. It shows how he changed) "IN OTHER TIMES, HERETICS AND SCHISMATICS LEFT THE CHURCH. TODAY, AS ST.PIUS X WARNED US, THEY REMAIN, TO MAKE HER EVOLVE FROM WITHIN, AND TO SEDUCE, IF IT WERE POSSIBLE, ALL OR PART OF THE FLOCK OF THE HOLY BISHOP... BUT ONE DOES NOT DEAL WITH THIS KIND OF ENEMY, ALL THE MORE SO, THAT HE IS CUNNING. (We should not even deal with them, because they are too cunning.) ONE DOES NOT NEGOTIATE WITH HIM A FALSE AND SEPARATE PEACE. (This was Father Aulagnier 15 years BEFORE his change!) ONE FIGHTS HIM TILL THE END, STRONG IN HIS RIGHT - DEUS VULT! - GOD WILLS IT! - REMINDING HIM OF THE TRUTH HE ATTACKS IN VAIN... ROME KNOWS IT MADE AN ERROR, A GRAVE ERROR: THE EXCOMMUNICATION (AGAINST ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE). HOW TO REPAIR THE ERROR? TIME WILL TELL. IN ANY CASE, NOT WITHOUT A FRANK RETURN

OF THE HIERARCHY TO THE TOTAL AND INTEGRAL CONFESSION OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH WHOLE AND ENTIRE. THE DAY WILL COME WHEN ROME, BY ITS CONVERSION, WILL FIND OUR SERENITY." (And Fr. Violette comments: SEEMS LIKE HE HAS LOST HIS SERENITY. (And here is Father Violette, who had put that quote there to show that Father Aulagnier has changed! It is like the Russian dolls, you know: A little doll put into a bigger doll, both put into a bigger doll. So I am reading this to you to show that Father Violette has changed and, in his letter, he used a quote of Father Aulagnier to show that Father Aulagnier had changed!)

DEAR FAITHFUL, DO NOT LOSE YOUR SERENITY, STAND CALM, FIRM IN THE UNCHANGING FAITH OF ALL TIMES. DO NOT ABANDON THE FIGHT. SURE IT IS DRAGGING ON. BUT WE WILL WIN. (And then the best wishes for Christmas and all that.)

So, my dear faithful, I will send you a link to this and you can print it and show that to your friends who tell you that the Society has not changed and blah, blah, blah. Okay, That's... I don't think we can find a better proof!

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen! source


 
Last edited:
Top