This is so big The Recusant gives Fr. Girouard his own web page!


IMHO The Recusant has firmly established itself as the Go-To reference for
all those who would want to know what's up in street, bar none.   Good Job!!



 


French: http://www.lasapiniere.info/declaration-aux-membres-de-la-fraternite-st-pie-x/


Holy Thursday, 28th March, 2013

Dear brothers and sisters in Christ the King,

On this day when the Holy Church solemnly commemorates the institution of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the sacrament of Holy Orders, I take this opportunity to inform you of my decision to place myself outside the official structure of the Society. My intention is neither to abandon nor to vilify it. The Society is victim of an enterprise that aims to bring it under the power of the Conciliar Church, despite repeated warnings of its founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

Following my sermons and interventions against a rallying, my district superior, Fr. Jürgen Wegner, transferred me from the Priory of Langley (near Vancouver) to District Headquarters (St-Césaire, near Montreal) with the expressed intention of "closely monitoring" me. He also said that I could no longer criticise the superiors. In his letter to Canadian priests regarding his decision, he attacked not only my public statements, but also my emails and private conversations with the faithful. It is clear that I was being offered to exchange the material welfare of remaining in the Society for my silence in public and in private. This would be no more no less than a form of spiritual prostitution. But I have a soul, and I want to save it. I cannot do that by accepting this deal because, as the saying goes: “silence is tantamount to consent.” This is basically why I see it as a moral obligation to refuse the transfer. This is the only way for me to continue to work towards achieving the true goal of the Society, which is not to convert modernist Rome, but to preserve and transmit the true Mass and the true priesthood. So I put myself in the hands of Providence, convinced that Our Lord will take good care of His priest.

Much has been written on the subject of a "purely practical" agreement with Rome. Suffice to say that I fully endorse the statements and studies by other colleagues who are opposed to this new orientation of the Society. I shan’t repeat them here. I would, however, like to share some personal reflections on the three aspects of the crisis of the Society:

  1. Society authorities want to justify the abandonment of the resolution of the General Chapter of 2006 ("No practical agreement without conversion of Rome"), by saying that the situation is not the same today. They would have us believe that many new bishops, priests, and seminarians are no longer interested in Vatican II and prefer the traditional Mass and theology. Yet they are unable to produce a serious and independent study to demonstrate this. We are being asked no less than to accept what Archbishop Lefebvre termed "Operation ѕυιcιdє." The General Chapter of 2012, far from correcting this change of direction only wrapped it up in cosmetic "conditions". The only condition that mattered, the conversion of Rome, was abandoned. In addition, this chapter occasioned a reversal of the balance of strength between bishops: From the 7th April 2012 when we had on one side three bishops against a "practical" agreement and on the other, an isolated Bishop Fellay, we found ourselves on the 14th July, with three bishops in favor of such an agreement against an ostracised Bishop Williamson, who had moreover been excluded from the said Chapter. The final statement about the newfound unity actually signalled the end of a period of grace for all "resisters". Henceforth, from 15th July 2012, all opposition vis-à-vis a purely practical agreement, any criticism of the authorities of the Society on this subject, became a crime against the Society itself. A law of silence was instituted. The rest is history. This law of silence is so powerful that Menzingen doesn’t even bother to respond to the arguments and accusations; opponents are simply demonised as vulgar rebels of subversive deeds! Exit H.E. Bishop Williamson and a score of priests!

2. H.E. Bishop Fellay’s secret docuмents (14th April 2012 letter to the three other bishops, Preamble the following day), which were published unofficially, allowed us to understand the extent to which frequent relations with today’s Rome are dangerous. If even before the signing of an agreement such contacts have changed the Superior General, his assistants, and, by extension, other Superiors, what would happen to simple priests and faithful when they would be officially, legally, permanently under the control of the Roman authorities? One has only to see how Menzingen already persecutes those who oppose this new direction even while we still enjoy a degree of independence vis-à-vis Rome, to understand how far they will go once under the authority of the conciliar Church!

3. Recently, it was asked of us to accept the theory that the term "conciliar Church" does not mean a separate institution of the Catholic Church, but rather a "movement" within it (cf. Fr.Gleize in DICI: http://www.dici.org/en/docuмents/can-one-speak-of-the-conciliar-church/). The logical consequence of this theory would be that the traditionalist movement should return to the formal structure of the Church, to fight from within the conciliar "movement" and thus help Tradition triumph. It is why we often hear SSPX authorities say that the Society must "help the Catholic Church to reclaim her Tradition." Now, on one hand, the Catholic Church, without her Tradition, could not exist, it would no longer be the Catholic Church. Furthermore, one can no longer speak of a mere "movement" when the liberal and Masonic ideas of Vatican II have been "institutionalised" by reforms covering all aspects of Church life: Liturgy, Catechism, Ritual, Bible, Ecclesiastical Tribunals, Higher Education, Magisterium and, above all, Canon Law. We are confronted with a structure, an institution which is different to the Catholic Church. If it weren’t the case, we would be members! But it is not us who have left the Catholic Church, they have, even if they managed to take control of the official structure. Concerning the role of the Pope in all this, it has to be admitted that therein lies a mystery, a mystery of iniquity. Nonetheless, it stands that we are in the presence of two separate institutions: The Catholic Church founded by Our Lord and the conciliar Church, instigated, let there be no doubt, by Lucifer.

These are just three small reflections, but I believe they can shed some light on some aspects of the debate. Now that I have become totally free to speak, you can count, dear brothers and sisters in Christ the King, on my regular contribution to the websites of the growing movement of opposition to the Ralliement, a movement that I believe deserves the name Catholic Resistance.


Pray for thy servant, as I pray for you.

Father Patrick Girouard, SSPX



Support Our Apostolate!

Help us to expose the subversion within the SSPX! Please consider making a small paypal donation to The Recusant.


"Viva Christo Rey!"

Between The Recusant and now Fr. Girouard's support, the Resistance takes
a step up into the category of "serious business."  Anyone who thought that it
wsa sraddling some kind of 'thin line' before should have no more doubts.

Frs. Pfeiffer Chazal and Hewko are no doubt taking notice.  

Some may say Fr. Morgan's taking notice too, but that's rather irrelevant, now.



I would like to thank the Editor of The Recusant for imbibing this Letter with
an impeccable English flavour, that is, if Fr. Girouard needed any assistance.
I don't see the slightest hint that it was authored by a French native speaker.

So obviously, I would expect that the French version would be equally
impeccable in its own way.  Come to think of it, these two versions should be
top-notch examples for English-French and French-English translation classes!!

Maybe the Menzingen-denizens can append them to the seminary curriculum!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Speaking as one of "the faithful," be reminded once again, that most of us who attend SSPX chapels are not "members."  If the chapel I attend goes Conciliar, I will leave.  

 Any "deal with Rome" in her current condition is unacceptable.  The reason I've been driving 260 miles per week for the last eight years has been for the privilege of hearing the Mass and receiving the Sacraments instituted by Christ, Himself.  If I were willing to accept "an excellent reenactment" or "the next closest thing," I could literally walk 10 blocks from my home to one of two daily 'motu' masses, or ride 20 minutes on the train to an independent chapel that is formally schismatic (and proud of it)!

The loss of the SSPX to Modernist heresy will deprive many of the graces needed to save their souls.  Herein lies the real tragedy, the loss of souls.

I find it interesting that our taking notice of these facts raises the accusation
of "divisiveness!" among so many well-meaning Catholics, even priests.  

They want so much to believe that their anti-sedevacantist foundation gives
credence to the idea that our superiors are still our superiors, our bishops
are still our bishops, and our pope is still our pope, that they are willing to
overlook the reports of +Fellay's Preamble of April 2012, saying that it is
not to be believed -- for "who leaked it?"  

I am frankly shocked to find they don't know what GREC is, and when you
try to explain it, they change the topic.  They don't want to hear about it!!!

They seem to be preferential to reading DICI and 'the blog' and SSPX.org,
and speak with disdain about "the resistance movement."  

This is a war of words, it seems to me.  The vision of many is clouded and they
are unable to see the facts, because of words.  

Why not call it what it is?  


Why not call it the Menzingen movement?

Yes, our research of this new cult has found that Members of the Menzingen Movement (MM) are issued rose colored glasses.

This enables them to call themselves trads, while ignoring the new doctrines and inherent evils of Vatican II.

Members of the MM   ~