.
Thread
Sermon of September 8th, 2013
Aldergrove, BC.
By Rev. Fr. P. Girouard, Old SSPX
So we will not have really a sermon as such. Today will be more some announcements, prolonged announcements, and commentaries, because something happened this week. What happened was that maybe 10 days ago, or so, I got an e-mail from Father Gerspacher saying that... (Father Gerspacher is the Prior of Christ the King in Langley, as you know); ...and he said that they had collected some mail. So those who have a problem hearing, you can come closer.
I see in the back that they are doing like this. (Father cups his hand behind his ear) No? No. Okay.
So, telling me that there was mail that arrived for me, through these last six-months, and that I should come and collect the mail; which was a little bit strange, because I had made an automatic change with Canada Post, but there was maybe a week or ten days before it took place, and so yes, I understood maybe some old mail, some mail from March must still be there. And so I answered and I said: "Well I will see then what I can do, when I will be back to Langley". Because the great long weekend was last week. And I normally do my business on Monday in Langley, and so I could not do it because everything was closed last Monday, so I had to go on Tuesday. And Tuesday was the Feast of Saint Pius X.
And I phoned the Priory on Tuesday, and said: "Well that's when I'm doing my errands, today, and I could stop by and pick up my mail." And Father Gerspacher was not there, but Father Rusak was there, He was very nice and said: "Sure Father, come." And so I went there and, you know, he was very nice and me too. (I can be nice, you know...). And we chatted a little bit, and so forth and so on; and there was a nice picture of Benedict XVI in his office with the blessing, a blessing of some sort on the picture. And then I saw on the wall this picture of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which I was looking for everywhere in the storage room that I have, and could not find it. And finally the fact is, I guess, the people in charge of my moving didn't pick it up. And so I said: "Well this is my picture..." Well he said: "You should take it." And I did. It's actually a gift for my first Mass I said after my ordination in Kansas City, given from the Kansas City faithful. And he said: "But before you leave, I have another piece of mail for you, and you have to sign for it." And it was a letter from Toronto, from Father Wegner.
And so this is actually my first Canonical Monition. The seal of the Society and that logo here and stuff, so I will read it to you. I was wondering when this would come. I thought they forgot about me or something. Apparently they didn't. So: “St. Césaire. Topic: The First Canonical Monition to the Reverend Patrick Girouard. Dear Father Girouard (I am still dear to them!) on March 13, 2013 I phoned you in order to announce your transfer from Langley to St. Césaire, giving you a delay of 15 days, in order to allow you reasonable time to make all the necessary arrangements. (Okay so March 13th he phoned me and gave me 15 days, so I had until March 28. That's true. He gave me until March 28th on that day. What he fails to mention in the letter, is that the next day he sent me an e-mail, and he cut it short by 4 days. So he said: "Well I made a mistake, it should not be the 28th it should be the 24th that you have to be in St. Césaire." Now in this letter, here, he doesn't mention that. And... But even if it would have been fifteen days, you know, it's very difficult to pack all of your things and move, with your car and everything, for 4,500 km (2,812 miles) in so short a time, and through the mountains in winter and everything, so it was a bit unrealistic.)
As of today you have verbally refused your assignment and you have opened your own chapel, 'St. Joseph Defender of the Church' in Aldergrove, and you have started your own website. (sacrificium.org. I hope they are looking at the website!) Having in mind that the members of the Society are obliged to reside in a house of the Institute, to observe the common life, and not to absent themselves without the permission of their Superiors. (And then all the numbers of Canon Law and all that). Having in mind that your public actions and declarations have caused a great scandal among the faithful, and that they constitute both a grave neglect of your obligations as member of the Society, and a stubborn disobedience to a legitimate order. (Yes, I am stubborn, it's true, in my disobedience, but the order was not legitimate. Anyways...) All offenses punishable with dismissal from the Society according to the law of the Church (Canons, blah, blah, blah), and according to the particular law of our Institute, (statute number blah blah), which considers as well as a supplementary offence the publication of a disagreement with the authority. (So in 2006 they made that rule that if you make a public disagreement with the authority this should not happen – like: You are disobedient).
Consequently, you place me in the sad obligation of issuing, with the consent of the Superior General (that means he has heard of me by now...) and his counsel, and after consultation with my own counsel (which I never knew existed before!), a first Canonical Monition, according to Canon (blah blah) commanding you, under penalty of dismissal from the Society of St. Pius X, to return to the obedience to your legitimate superiors by taking your post in St. Césaire without further delay. If you fail to comply within 15 days of receipt of this first Canonical Monition, I will issue a second Canonical Monition. If you fail to comply again, after 15 days the Superior General will institute proceedings leading to your dismissal from our Society for stubborn disobedience to legitimate orders in a grave matter, and for grave scandal, resulting from culpable behavior. You have the right to defend yourself, including a representation by a canonical counselor of your choice. (We don't have a canonical counselor in Canada, and so I don't know...). You have the right as well to present your defense directly to the Superior General in person or in writing. All your communications and responses will be given due consideration.
Given at Toronto, August 16, 2013. Father Freddy Mery, Notary; and Father Jurgen Wegner, Society of St. Pius X.”
So this is official, with the nice imprinted and engraved seal. So I will have it laminated and put on the wall of my room and I will kiss it every day! Okay? Because this is a certificate! A certificate proving that I have not changed, and that I am against the changes of the Society. They are condemning me because I have refused the grave scandal of Bishop Fellay: Of the April 15th Declaration of last year, when he said that the New Mass was legitimately promulgated. We know that something cannot be legitimately promulgated unless it is legitimate in itself. So when Bishop Fellay writes that the New Mass has been legitimately promulgated, that implies that the New Mass is legitimate. First big mistake! First big lie!
And then he says that he recognizes the New Code of Canon Law. New Code of Canon Law that we know Archbishop Lefebvre said was very bad! Because it has instituted all the reforms, and all the new mentality, and all the principles of Vatican II, into law. Vatican II is a series of docuмents and declarations and so forth and so on. But the New Code of Canon Law takes all of these new principles: of religious liberty, ecuмenism, collegiality, and the big mistake of the "subsistit in". As you know, instead of saying, like we used to say: That the Church established by Christ, the Church of Christ, IS the Catholic Church; Vatican II, and the New Code of Canon Law, say that it only SUBSISTS IN the Catholic Church. And so there are other churches that are members of the Church of Christ. That is one of the big mistakes of Vatican II. Now all of this is in the New Code of Canon Law.
So the Code of Canon Law defines and tells what the life of the members of the Catholic Church will be in practice, and an example of one of the very bad canons and laws of this New Code of Canon Law is canon 844. Which derives itself from that new definition of the Church: That the Church of Christ only "subsists in” the Catholic Church. It is not any more identified completely with the Catholic Church. In other words, there's others that can be part of a broader Church. Now, a result of this into law is that canon, that says that now Catholics can receive sacraments from non-Catholics, and we can give them to non-Catholics as well; which was always forbidden before. Under pain of grave sin. That's only one example.
Another example is about the Priesthood. I told you before, that the Archbishop of Winnipeg says that there is no difference, any difference whatsoever, between the clergy and the laity. That we all have been baptized, and that we all participate in that Royal Priesthood of Baptism. And I told you that therefore the ordinations made by this bishop are, at the least, doubtful, because it is doubtful to know whether he would have the intention of giving some powers into which he does not believe. If you don't believe in the special powers of the priesthood, in the priestly character of the ordination, how can you want to give it? So, now that principle of
Bishop Weisgerber in Winnipeg,* where does he take it from? He takes it from Vatican II, and he takes it from the New Code of Canon Law. It's not as explicit as what he thinks, but what he thinks is a logical consequence of those principles of Vatican II. That they call the Church now the "People of God" and the emphasis is put on baptism. And so that new Code of Canon Law is very bad, and yet Bishop Fellay says he accepts that New Code.
Another thing he wrote to Rome in April (2012), in the same docuмent, was that the Council Vatican II renders explicit elements of Tradition that were only contained implicitly before. In other words, Vatican II came and revealed to us some elements of the Revelation, of Tradition, that we were not aware of before Vatican II. He doesn't say which elements they are, and so you are free to think about anything: Maybe it's that new "People of God" thing; maybe is that "subsistit in" error. But we know it cannot be true! We know this Council is bad. We know that those who made this Council, all the modernist priests, and I gave you so many quotes last year, like Father Congar, and Father Ratzinger, even when he was just a Father, they all said that Vatican II is the French Revolution in the Church. Vatican II applies the principles of the French Revolution: Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. It puts these principles, these Anti-Christian principles, into the Catholic Church with Vatican II. And Bishop Fellay says Vatican II explains, renders explicit, and renders obvious, elements of Tradition, which were hidden. This is our Superior General!
And then [he] and 39 other members, a few weeks after that, a couple of months after that, they signed the Declaration of the General Chapter -- which opened the door to an agreement with Rome, without asking for the conversion of Rome anymore. It was always, since 1988, after Archbishop Lefebvre realized, in his own words (you can find that in the French magazine 'Fideliter' of the Fall of 1988 issue 69 and issue 70), Archbishop Lefebvre himself said: “If we would have gone along with what I had signed in May, it was Operation ѕυιcιdє." He realized, after the signature, that he had gone too far! And he said: The condition now before we start any negotiations - let alone sign an agreement - before to start to negotiate, he said: Conversion of Rome! And in practice he said: The Pope will have to prove to me that he agrees with all the docuмents of Leo XIII, Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Pius XII and all that. We cannot discuss with them unless they go back to that traditional doctrine. And the words he used, he said: "It would be a dialogue of the deaf”. A dialogue of two people who can't hear each other. Because we want to uphold Tradition, we want to uphold the Kingdom of Christ in society, and they want to uphold democracy, and they want to uphold the liberty for all religions.
But now Bishop Fellay agrees to sign, not only discuss, but to sign, even if Rome doesn't change. He agrees to put ourselves under the rule of these modernists. We just have to continue, but he doesn't understand. I don't know why, nobody knows why, but he has that kind of a fever for an agreement with Rome. And the General Chapter agrees with him. And these docuмents have not changed. These docuмents are still official, and the letter of last June, of the three Bishops, only reinforces the same thing. When you read it the first time it sounds pretty good. When you read it the second time you find out flaws, and the third time you find out even more. So now they are not even talking anymore about the necessity of an agreement. They agree that Rome could just say: "Okay you're fine! We don't need to sign anything. We'll just declare that you're okay." So it could be done, just like that! (Father snaps his fingers).
And it is an illusion to think that they will fight. They say: Yes we have that condition, that we asked the permission to fight you. What does Rome care? They don't care about it! They can give it two hundred times that permission! Because they know that once we are inside, once we have all these nice... Personal Prelature, and all these nice things that they will give to us, we will not dare to do anything that could cause them to remove it from us. Because once we accept these things in principle, once we accept to go back, in the eyes of the world, we will be approving all the rest that they do. If you accept to enter a house, you know, where bad things are happening, and you are yourself, suppose, a policeman or something and you accept to live there. Even if you sign a letter to say there are bad things happening in this house! “I don't agree with these things happening in this house!” It doesn't matter: You live there! Therefore your practical action contradicts whatever word you say or letter you sign. And so they want to be recognized, they want to have this structure, and they will fear to lose it.
And, therefore, they will tone down everything wrong that Rome and the Pope do, and they will extoll, and they will praise to high heaven, everything, the little things good that they can do. In other words, they will adopt the same attitude that the Fraternity of St. Peter has adopted, and all the other communities Ecclesia Dei: Tone down the bad things, lift up and extoll the good things that happen in Rome. Because they want to justify their own compromise with Rome. They want to show to their faithful: "You know, finally, Rome is not that bad. We can work with them. We can change them from the inside." But they will be silenced. And if we look at the Society, they already have changed!
The Society is now doing exactly the same process of saying something good about the Pope and toning down the bad things. So, for instance, last January, Pope Benedict XVI went to New York, and on January 1st he made a big declaration. There was couple of good things. He said he was against abortion, and he said he was for the family. That's good. I don't disagree with that. But then he said he was for religious liberty, and religious liberty is that every religion should be placed under common law. On the same level. They should all receive the same liberties. They should all be equal. Now this is an error that goes straight away against the Encyclical, "Quas Primas" of Pius XI which defines that Christ must reign, not only in the individual, but also in society. That it is the duty of society to promote the reign of Christ the King. And that governments have the duty to help Christ reign in Society, with their laws. That is the doctrine of the Church. The principle of religious liberty goes straight away against that doctrine. It is a heresy!
And we have Pope Benedict XVI reaffirming in detail, in that conference, of January 1st this year, that same religious liberty, what it is, and that it is good, and that it is the goal of the Church! Now you go to DICI, the official website of the Society, and they talk about that sermon of the Pope. But what they say is: The Pope made a good sermon! He says he was against abortion. He says he was for the family. Good for the Pope! Nothing about what he said on religious liberty. Nothing! And so you see then, that comes from DICI. That comes from our own Society of St. Pius X's official website.
Same thing also: If you want to know really what's going on with Pope Francis, you cannot go to DICI anymore. You will not learn a thing. You have to go to other websites. For instance, you will never find a picture on DICI, or a video on DICI, where the Pope carries the beach ball when he came back from Brazil, from the World Youth Day... The Pope carrying the beach ball, and putting the beach ball on the main altar of St. Mary Major. You will never see that on DICI. You will never see Bishop Fellay, you know, enraged about all this. And he should be enraged! You don't do that! A cathedral is not a beach! And you've seen also these... I sent you the links to some videos about the bishops; 300 bishops dancing, with their cassocks on, being filmed and dancing you know, the day before the mass, and during mass, even with their miters on, and even with the chasuble on. During the Mass of the Pope (on July 28th)! I won't imitate them, because I don't want to start doing the same mistake that they do. But you will not see that on DICI.
You will not see either, in The Angelus or on DICI, the pictures of the people who distributed communion during the Pope's Mass, in Rio, Brazil. Pictures I sent to you just a couple of weeks ago, in August. I am telling you these things! The Resistance is telling you these things! But not the Society. So you could see these people, basically teenagers, young women mostly, in tight outfits, in pants, and leotards (you call them) and with a t-shirt of World Youth Day, and then one of them had a big plastic bowl full of hosts, which were supposed to be consecrated. I hope it was invalid. But it's supposed to be consecrated. A big bowl like this, and she came and then they have plastic cups, like coffee cups, you know, and they would scoop the hosts in their plastic cups, and they would go give communion to the people. At the Mass of the Pope of the Catholic Church, my dear friends!
And Bishop Fellay says: Things are changing! They are becoming more traditional. Youth don't like Vatican II. They don't know Vatican II anymore. They don't like it. They like the traditional Mass! Well, go and have a look at the three million people, on the beach, at the Mass of the Pope. At that big hoola boola orgy. Okay? We cannot call that a Mass: Three and half million people, dressed like... Ahh! And singing Rock and Roll and what not!
Where is Bishop Fellay? I am trying to hear him! Maybe I can? (Father cups his hands behind his ears) Can I hear Bishop Fellay? Talking against this? Unfortunately not. Maybe I need to have a little implant in my ear. Have you heard him? Did you read anything against these things? No? Well, me neither! Now we have a new Society! That's what it means. The chiefs, the Superiors, have changed the Society!
And I have refused, and I am stubborn in my refusal and, yes, I am stubborn in my disobedience to follow that change. And one day, if I am saved, that will be because of that stubborn disobedience. Because I have spoken out. Because I have told you the truth. And if you are saved, that will be because of the same reason. Because you stood up for your convictions, and because you gave an example to all the world of Tradition, that it is possible to stand up, and it is possible to DO something, and it is possible to have a parish of the Resistance! And why do we call it Resistance? In fact we should say: A parish of the Society! Of the real SSPX! Of the old SSPX that has not changed!
So, right now, they are threatening to expel me from the New SSPX! It doesn't scare me! Because I have never belonged to that New SSPX. From day one, I refused that New SSPX! I remain in my old SSPX. And so this is why, well, this is a bit of news, and it is good to recapitulate a bit what happened, and let us pray that I get the next one, and I get the final one as soon as possible; that I can have a nice wall with all these nice docuмents that will tell me: Well! That's good! You are not part of the New SSPX!
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
* NOTA BENE: I will soon publish a docuмent showing where, in the Vatican II docuмents, Archbishop Weisgerber found the source of his error mentioned above.
.
Topic: Collection of SSPX Resistance Writings (Read 193707 times)