Fr. Chazal update from India

Through intimidation techniques applied to the faithful who have been sentenced to no longer have the Father Valan Rajkumar was forced to take control of all missions that revolve around the city of Chennai, capital of Tamil Nadu .

 Among the Mass centers of Saidapet (50 people), Bangalore (to our surprise 50 people in the north of the city), Margao (50 people also came to Good Shepherd Mass) and the city of RN Kandighai (300 people), Father Valan deals with a total of 450 faithful to which must be added those who are scattered in this big country. As an example, Roland Fernandez awaits us in Delhi, and some families attached to the position of Archbishop Lefebvre are present in the Persian Gulf. You also have to add the rest of Tamil Nadu, where he now helps Fr. Pancras, an old friend of Bishop Williamson. He will go to Chennai every month to deal with all nightly First Fridays of the month, a true spiritual marathon. Father Ignatius Xavier also received us with open arms. He asked us to help him build a church for his 100 followers of Tuticorin and is very impatient with official SSPX, because nothing has been done in 30 years of their presence for this group which is one of the largest in India. Father Selvaraj accepted to undertake our group in Coimbatore, west of Tamil Nadu.

 We have been well received in Mumbai and Vasai where most faithful understands very well what is happening today in the Tradition. The fact that we could not visit them for 11 months since the last crisis in May, did not stop them to be informed and prepared to receive us. The reception at Palayamkottai left much to be desired, although this was not surprising.

If we add the missions in the Far East, over 1000 faithful, seven priests and four potential seminarians have escaped the liberal domain.

We conclude that in less than a year, the beginning of resistance in Asia is promising. The timing is perfect, with the organization of external visits, financial support, publications (we project printing 2000 missals), and the establishment of a hierarchy ad hoc, yet informal for the moment. The excessive and liberal behavior of certain local priests, the expulsion of Bishop Williamson and the unfortunate statement of April 15, 2012 (no withdrawal in their substance) have allowed many eyes to be opened.

In Jesu et Maria

Francois Chazal +

Original at: http://aveclimmaculee.blogspot.mx/2013/04/percee-de-la-resistance-en-inde.html
=====================================================

This is great news!  As if Asia wasn't big enough, you're also taking on India!
Well, I suppose you could say that's part of Asia, no?  I wouldn't be too
surprised, though, if the diverse population of India & Sri Lanka thinks of
themselves as their own continent!!  Kind of like a little Europe, no?

Fr. Chazal, your writing is looking more and more like you are studying
Bishop Williamson's ECs.  The language of English is what unites India - so
these 1000 Faithful no doubt do appreciate reading the Recusant!  I can
imagine crowds standing around the only Internet computer in town, all
reading from a single monitor at its largest font setting:





   :rahrah:    The Recusant    :rahrah:

Your hard earned dollars have, in this priestly jaunt, fallen into the Black Hole of Calcutta.  

Are you trying to get yourself banned, ajnc?  How dare you sit back in your
smug ignorance and pass judgment on the works of a missionary priest on
the front lines?  You should be ashamed of yourself.  

An excellent letter written by Fr. Francis addressed to Fr. Chazal. The link is: http://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/Society_of_Saint_Pius_X/2013-04-19_Fr_Laisneys_answer_to_%20Fr_Chazal.pdf?p=16999

You've hid under a rock for nearly three years to post this nonsense???

"An excellent letter?"  Maybe you should look up the word, "excellent."  

HAHAHAHAHAHA

1
Response to a letter of Fr Chazal
by Fr François Laisney
Singapore,
April 19, 2013

Reverend and dear Father,

Since when can you hold that the burden of proof is on the accused? Is it not
rather on the accuser?  You are the ones who accuse Bishop Fellay of being a
liberal; you are the ones who should prove it!  Therefore you got it all wrong when
you write:

“So you start by saying that we have failed to prove Bishop Fellay wrong ..... Fine!
But prove it!”

Then you go on saying that you merely quote Bishop Fellay. Here again there is
another great default: the quotes you give may be imperfect, even defective, but
it is wrong for you to interpret them in the worst light possible, ignoring the
circuмstances and the context. Have you ever read St. Thomas in his Summa?

Whether doubts should be interpreted for the best? ... Yet it is better to err
frequently through thinking well of a wicked man, than to err less frequently
through having an evil opinion of a good man, because in the latter case an injury
is inflicted, but not in the former. (IIa IIae qu. 60 a.4 ad 1m)

Thus the habit of interpreting for the worse the saying of another man is a great
vice. St. Thomas explains (ibid. a.3) that:  this is due to a man being ill-
disposed towards another: for when a man hates or despises another, or is angry
with or envious of him, he is led by slight indications to think evil of him, because
everyone easily believes what he desires.

It is rather evident that such “ill-disposition” towards “the authorities of the SSPX”  
is permeating the writings of yourself and your companions. Such a disposition is
not virtuous.

To show how viciously you pretend to quote Bishop Fellay, one only needs to
check the quote in your letter. This is what you write:

Yeah, sure, Bp. Fellay should have free reign to commit his malicious destruction
of everything ABL built up, without any opposition!!  Hey -- where does St.
Thomas expound on that principle??  Oh, he doesn't??  Why not??  DUUUUHHH..

This thing is 6 pages long but who even needs to read the rest?  

We know what F. Laisney is all about, and it shows in his first sentence.  
We didn't need to read the second sentence.  But I put up 19 of them.  And he
doesn't let up.  But then, he hasn't let up for years already so why should he
start now?  

This is GARBAGE.  Except where he quotes St. Thomas.  But even that's out
of context!!  Hey!! Isn't that what +Fellay accused his critics for doing?  Now
his Menzingen-denizens are doing it.  I wonder if +Fellay will get upset for
F. Laisney quoting someone out of context?  Hmmmm?  

But it gets better:

Fr. Laisney accuses Fr. Chazal of quoting
out of context by quoting to him
St. Thomas -- OUT OF CONTEXT!!  


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA  

You can't make this stuff up!!

Fr. Chazal would never be so disrespectful to a priest.  

So folks, the pressure is on, and Fr. Laisney is showing his weakness.  
He's beginning to crack.  Sad.


Maybe he sees that the jig is up, and he can't take the pressure??  

Yeah, that's probably it.  Sad.  

Quote from: donatus

An excellent letter written by Fr. Francis addressed to Fr. Chazal. The link is: http://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/Society_of_Saint_Pius_X/2013-04-19_Fr_Laisneys_answer_to_%20Fr_Chazal.pdf?p=16999

You've hid under a rock for nearly three years to post this nonsense???

"An excellent letter?"  Maybe you should look up the word, "excellent."  

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Yeah, sure, Bp. Fellay should have free reign to commit his malicious destruction
of everything ABL built up, without any opposition!!  Hey -- where does St.
Thomas expound on that principle??  Oh, he doesn't??  Why not??  DUUUUHHH..

This thing is 6 pages long but who even needs to read the rest?  

We know what F. Laisney is all about, and it shows in his first sentence.  
We didn't need to read the second sentence.  But I put up 19 of them.  And he
doesn't let up.  But then, he hasn't let up for years already so why should he
start now?  

This is GARBAGE.  Except where he quotes St. Thomas.  But even that's out
of context!!  Hey!! Isn't that what +Fellay accused his critics for doing?  Now
his Menzingen-denizens are doing it.  I wonder if +Fellay will get upset for
F. Laisney quoting someone out of context?  Hmmmm?  

But it gets better:

Fr. Laisney accuses Fr. Chazal of quoting
out of context by quoting to him
St. Thomas -- OUT OF CONTEXT!!  

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA  

You can't make this stuff up!!

Fr. Chazal would never be so disrespectful to a priest.  

So folks, the pressure is on, and Fr. Laisney is showing his weakness.  
He's beginning to crack.  Sad.

Maybe he sees that the jig is up, and he can't take the pressure??  

Yeah, that's probably it.  Sad.  

Where I was hidden all these years is irrelevant to the issue that I am trying to bring up in this thread. I see that you have posted more than 3000 statements within ONE year. I can't imagine that most of your 3000 posting must be just utter rubbish. But I give you the benefit of the doubt.

Excellent means 'outstanding'. Do you understand?

Your wild accusation against Bishop Fellay is merely a human opinion not worth a cent for me to argue.  Were you there to see EVERYTHING? You must have read thoughtfully all the 6 pages long of Fr. Francis' reply to Fr. Chazal's unjust attack against SSPX, and straight away you claim to know ALL about Fr. Francis. Are you God, or something? Are you one of the seminarian or another disobedient priest within SSPX spying and planning to destroy SSPX? I don't think you are!

Backup your claim that Fr. Francis is showing his 'weakness' and 'can't take the pressure' if you understand what those words mean to you.

If there are any English words that you don't understand, please let me know. I can look up the words for you. I just use Google. BTW, please speak for yourself.

donatus

Your wild accusation against Bishop Fellay is merely a human opinion not worth a cent for me to argue.

Again fair play to you for admonishing the rumour-mongers. It's mere opinion, accusations made by nutters. There is no reason not to trust Bishop Fellay. I have ever confidence you will quell the rebellion.

I'm not sure what is happening to the Resistance in Asia, but in Fr. Laisney's response to Fr. Chazal, he wrote:
........ another faithful recently was shocked to see in our sacristy the name of the local bishop......

Has either Archbishop Chia of Singapore or Archbishop Murphy Pakiam from Kuala Lumpur given permission to Fr Laisney or the SSPX to use their names for any purpose whatsoever, be it in the SSPX liturgy, or "in the sacristy" or whatever/wherever?

Quote from: Francisco

Quote from: trento

I'm not sure what is happening to the Resistance in Asia, but in Fr. Laisney's response to Fr. Chazal, he wrote:
........ another faithful recently was shocked to see in our sacristy the name of the local bishop......

Has either Archbishop Chia of Singapore or Archbishop Murphy Pakiam from Kuala Lumpur given permission to Fr Laisney or the SSPX to use their names for any purpose whatsoever, be it in the SSPX liturgy, or "in the sacristy" or whatever/wherever?

Do you need permission to pray for someone?

Trento, this is official prayer we are talking about. The two good Archbishops could well say that the SSPX is "passing off" as a part of their respective Churches. The SSPX is not listed in the Catholic Church Directories of either Singapore or Kuala Lumpur.

Privately, we can pray for anyone.