Number CCCLXVII (367) July 26, 2014

France Stirs

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many of you know that on Tuesday and Wednesday of last week was held in the Dominican Friary of Avrillé close to Angers in North-west France a meeting of resistant priests from wherever the “Resistance” is up and running, but mainly from France. This was the third such meeting of French priests held in Avrillé since the beginning of the year, and it was the most important. This time they began to co-ordinate and to organize their activities in France, a country often decisive for the Church in various ways.

The credit for calling these meetings goes to the Prior of Avrillé, Fr Pierre-Marie. For several years Avrillé has been offering support and a refuge to priests of the Society of St Pius X who have been finding their priestly life more and more difficult under its present leadership, whose pursuit of reconciliation with the Newchurch in Rome is, despite the disguise and denials, relentless. Only a few weeks ago the Society’s Second Assistant is reported to have said, “The train is leaving for Rome, and those who want to get off will get off.” For as long as possible Fr Pierre-Marie sought not to break off relations with the official SSPX, but earlier this year came the letter from Bishop Fellay finalising the rupture. That was inevitable, unless Avrillé would also betray Tradition.

Originally Fr Pierre-Marie designed last week’s meeting for the French priests, but I suggested to him that resistant priests from outside France might also be invited for a double reason: the priests from outside would be encouraged to see the “Resistance” stirring in France, where it has stirred little – outwardly – up till now, and the French priests in turn might be reminded that there is not only France. Fr Pierre-Marie accepted my suggestion, and that is how it turned out, some 18 priests in all.

The meeting went very well. There was little looking back and no bitterness, much looking forward. The first day’s business was largely for the French priests. They began by nominating as their co-ordinator Fr. de Mérode, a priest from Belgium with 30 years’ experience in the SSPX, all over the world. Then for their organisation being born they chose the name of “Priestly Union of Marcel Lefebvre,” a name that announces clearly the orientation. And finally Fr. De Mérode began organising a network of Mass centres all over France – back to the 1970’s, but in harsher conditions, and with very limited resources, at least for the moment.

The second day’s business was given over to international concerns for the defence of the Faith, and here of course arose the question of episcopal consecrations, because I for one wished to know the mind of the priests present. It was relatively unanimous. Readers will be encouraged to know that while the priests thought that the time for consecrations had not yet come, nevertheless it could not be too far off. For indeed as of now it is very difficult to imagine any of the three bishops who remain within the SSPX undertaking to consecrate anybody without the approval of |Rome, and it is impossible to imagine neo-modernist Rome approving of any anti-modernist candidate! Patience.

Do pray, both for the quiet success of the budding Priestly Union, and for God to give us, in his good time, the additional bishops needed for the defence of the Faith.

Kyrie eleison.

im off ! :boxer:

Quote

Only a few weeks ago the Society’s Second Assistant is reported to have said, “The train is leaving for Rome, and those who want to get off will get off.”

 :sad:

They should make sure to have a psychiatric check up before boarding. What was the Society's 45 year apostolate all about?

.

We keep complaining that +W refuses to "lead the Resistance" while he says that "a loose association of independent priests" for now, might be the surest model to employ for at least a while.

Originally, Fr Pierre-Marie designed last week’s meeting for the French priests, but I suggested to him that resistant priests from outside France might also be invited for a double reason: the priests from outside would be encouraged to see the “Resistance” stirring in France, where it has stirred little – outwardly – up till now, and the French priests in turn might be reminded that there is not only France. Fr Pierre-Marie accepted my suggestion, and that is how it turned out, some 18 priests in all.

..in other words, while perhaps H.E. is not the acknowledged "leader of the Resistance," nonetheless, such an important meeting as this has become something it "Originally," would not have been.  For as it had been designed for the French priests exclusively in principio, after his observation of the plan and his subsequent suggestion to modify it for two good reasons, which see, an adjustment was made, and other priests from outside of France were included as well.  

IOW even if H.E. is not the acknowledged leader of the Resistance, in France, the Resistance listens to +W's suggestions on important matters.  The Menzingen-denizens might have attempted to exile H.E., but all they've managed to do is provide the Resistance with a wise counsel, one that is anything but exiled from the Resistance.

What were the two reasons, again?  You didn't miss them, did you, perhaps reading this EC too hastily?

1)  The first of the "double reason" is,  'The priests from outside would be encouraged to see the “Resistance” stirring in France, where it has stirred little – outwardly – up till now.'  First things first.  How long have we been waiting for the Resistance to "stir" in France?  "How long, O Lord, how long?"  "Those who persevere to the end shall be saved."  This is the first thing because, when France stirs, the Church moves.  The Eldest Daughter of the Church, with faith of a mustard seed, can move mountains.  Last week's meeting was the faith of a mustard seed in France.  Mountains shall be moved.

2)  The second reason of the "double" was as follows:  "the French priests in turn might be reminded that there is not only France."  For the French sometimes think of France as being a place unto its own, a kind of island, or a separate reality.  But France, while distinct, must not be misconstrued as separate, because, in the Catholic Faith, we distinguish but we do not separate.  While +W did not go so far as to pronounce these words of wisdom, nonetheless, he has what it takes to apply them when the time comes............  The time came, and he did so.  He did so in precisely the same way the Leader of the Resistance would have done so, even while not leading with a heavy hand.  His leadership is wise and his counsel sound.  And when the Resistance listens, everyone wins.


.

Quote from: MaterDominici

Quote

Only a few weeks ago the Society’s Second Assistant is reported to have said, “The train is leaving for Rome, and those who want to get off will get off.”

 :sad:

They should make sure to have a psychiatric check up before boarding. What was the Society's 45 year apostolate all about?

Countless people have been asking that question over the years. It never has paid to have any firm ideas as to the final destination of this train and people encountered within the Society have tended to be wishy-washy on this point. But then the management has wanted that all along; it afterall is in control of the train and its passengers either stay aboard or get off. There has never been any attempt to accommodate disaffection of any kind; those who question are not welcome and, of course, years of service and material contributions are not refundable.

   

Quote from: Francisco

Quote from: MaterDominici

Quote

Only a few weeks ago the Society’s Second Assistant is reported to have said, “The train is leaving for Rome, and those who want to get off will get off.”

 :sad:

They should make sure to have a psychiatric check up before boarding. What was the Society's 45 year apostolate all about?

Countless people have been asking that question over the years. It never has paid to have any firm ideas as to the final destination of this train and people encountered within the Society have tended to be wishy-washy on this point. But then the management has wanted that all along; it afterall is in control of the train and its passengers either stay aboard or get off. There has never been any attempt to accommodate disaffection of any kind; those who question are not welcome and, of course, years of service and material contributions are not refundable.  

There have been people like Hutton Gibson who claimed that the SSPX ($$PX according to him) was both a money sucking operation as well as one that would ensnare Traditional Catholics and take them back into the Conciliar Church. People like him are proving correct it seems ......

.I'll cut to the chase and give you the answer first, then provide the problem below, in the event you'd like to see the process in action.


Unless Avrillé would follow Menzingen in their betrayal of Tradition, it was inevitable that Bishop Fellay would send a letter that finalizes the rupture between Menzingen and Avrillé.  And so the letter that had to come, came, even though for as long as possible, Fr. Pierre-Marie had sought to not break off relations with the official SSPX.  We are reminded that only a few weeks ago, that is, about when that fateful letter would most likely have been composed, the Society's Second Assistant (Fr. Pfluger) was reported to have said, “The train is leaving for Rome, and those who want to get off will get off.”  Who would suspect the speaker may not have also been the author?  This is right in line with the relentless pursuit of a reconciliation of the Society with Newchurch in Rome, which the present leadership of the SSPX continues to practice, all the while also wearing disguises to implicate the contrary and perpetrating denials of same.  In this climate of deception and milieu of subversive if not-so-silent revolution, priests of the Society of St. Pius X who have been finding their priestly life more and more difficult under its present deceptive and subversive leadership, have found a refuge in the support proffered by the magnanimous Fr. Pierre-Marie, Prior of Avrillé, France, who for several years now has been taking them in and nurturing their souls like did the monasteries of the Age of Faith a few short centuries ago.  And to this same Prior, Fr. Pierre-Marie, goes the credit for calling the meetings in France, of which this present one has been the third.



The information from that paragraph is all taken from this one, found in the EC (with a few items H.E. has provided in prior ECs):

The credit for calling these meetings goes to the Prior of Avrillé, Fr Pierre-Marie. For several years Avrillé has been offering support and a refuge to priests of the Society of St Pius X who have been finding their priestly life more and more difficult under its present leadership, whose pursuit of reconciliation with the Newchurch in Rome is, despite the disguise and denials, relentless. Only a few weeks ago the Society’s Second Assistant is reported to have said, “The train is leaving for Rome, and those who want to get off will get off.” For as long as possible Fr Pierre-Marie sought not to break off relations with the official SSPX, but earlier this year came the letter from Bishop Fellay finalising the rupture. That was inevitable, unless Avrillé would also betray Tradition.

What I have done, is to start at the end, and work my way backwards through the paragraph, and adding a few words here and there that serve to connect the concepts being laid down in reverse order.  Why do you suppose that nearly twice as many words are involved going in reverse this way?  If you don't think that the extra words are necessary, here is what it would look like without them:  

Unless Avrillé would also betray Tradition, that was inevitable.  But the letter from Bishop Fellay finalising the rupture came earlier this year.  Fr. Pierre-Marie sought not to break off relations with the official SSPX, for as long as possible.  “The train is leaving for Rome, and those who want to get off will get off,” the Society's Second Assistant is reported to have said, only a few weeks ago.  Relentless is, despite the denials and disguise, whose pursuit of reconciliation with the Newchurch in Rome, under its present leadership, priests of the Society of St. Pius X have been finding their priestly life more and more difficult, to [whom] a refuge and support has been [offered] for several years, [by] Avrillé.  To the Prior of Avrillé, Fr Pierre-Marie, the credit goes for calling these meetings.

I changed "who" to "whom" and "offering" to "offered" and added "by" in order to make the grammar correct.  The meaning and substance are identical.  But the effectiveness of this literal version is obviously compromised, compared to the first one, above.

So you see, the words I changed and added were to make the GoogleTran-ish comprehensible, and to lessen the compromised effectiveness thereof, and that is all.

This has been an exercise in grammar logic, to show how taking the same objective information in reverse order may demand the addition of a few more words to make the meaning less ambiguous.  Why the direction +W chose is shorter might be entirely due to his style of seeking the most brief arrangement, and other things being equal, brevity is to be preferred over a greater duration.


.