CathInfo.com

http://lefebvristes.forum-box.com/t1557-DECLARATION-Aux-membres-de-la-FSSPX-aux-communautes-et-fideles-par-l-abbe-Patrick-Girouard.htm

The Resistance has a new priest.

Happy Easter!

I hope he comes to Toronto.

DECLARATION
members of the Society of St. Pius X
Communities and the faithful friends of Tradition
   
 Posted on March 28, 2013

On Holy Thursday, March 28, 2013

           

Dear brothers and sisters in Christ the King
           

On this day when the Holy Church commemorates the institution of the grand manner Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the sacrament of Holy Orders, I take this opportunity to inform you of my decision to place outside the formal structure of the Fraternity. My intention is not to leave, or the vilification. She is victim of a company that aims to bring 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, Father Jürgen Wegner, I was transferred to the Priory of Langley (near Vancouver) at district headquarters (St-Césaire, near Montreal) with the avowed intention of me "closely monitor". He also said that I could not criticize superiors. In his letter to priests Canadians about his decision, he attacked not only my public statements, but also to my emails and conversations private, shared with the faithful. It is therefore clear that offered me in exchange for my silence in public and in private, to keep me in the Brotherhood, and thus ensure my physical safety. This would be neither more nor less than a form of spiritual prostitution. Now I have a soul, and I want to save it. I can not do that by accepting this market because, as the saying goes: "Who says nothing, agrees." This is basically why I see a moral obligation to refuse the transfer. This is the only way for me to continue to work to achieve the real goal of the Brotherhood, which is not converted modernist Rome, but to preserve and transmit the true Mass and the true priesthood. So I placed in the hands of Providence, convinced that Our Lord will take good care of her priest.            

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

 1.the authorities Brotherhood want to justify the abandonment of the resolution of the General Chapter of 2006 ("Disagree practice without conversion of Rome"), 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 the Mass and prefer traditional theology. But it is unable to produce a serious and independent study that would demonstrate. We do not ask us to accept less than what Lefebvre termed "Operation ѕυιcιdє." The General Chapter of 2012, far from correcting the shooting did not qu'envelopper "conditions" cosmetics this shift. The only condition that mattered, the conversion of Rome was indeed abandoned. In addition, this chapter was the opportunity of a reversal of the power relationship between bishops: April 7, 2012, we had, on one side, three bishops against an agreement "practical" and the other, Bishop Fellay isolated one, it was found, on 14 July, with three bishops in favor of such an agreement against a Williamson ostracized, who had also been excluded from the said Chapter. The final statement about the unit reported actually found the end of the recreation for all "refractory". Now, from 15 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 Brotherhood itself. It was instituted by the law of silence. The rest is history. This law of silence is so strong that Menzingen does not even bother to respond to the arguments and accusations, we simply demonize opponents as merely vulgar rebels and subversive! Exit SE Williamson, and two dozen priests!
2.the secret docuмents HE Bishop Fellay (letter of 14 April 2012 the three other bishops Preamble same day), which were published in spite of himself, allowed us to understand the extent to which frequent intercourse with Rome current are dangerous. If such contacts have changed, even before the signing of an agreement, the Superior General, his assistants, and, by extension, other Superiors, what would happen to simple priests and faithful when would officially legally, permanently under the control of the Roman authorities? One has only to see how far Menzingen already persecuting those who oppose this new direction, while we still enjoy a degree of independence vis-à-vis Rome, to understand how far we will once under the authority of the Conciliar Church!
3.Recemment, we also wanted us to accept the theory that the term "Conciliar Church" does not mean a separate institution of the Catholic Church, but rather a "trend" within it (see DICI, study m. Gleize Abbot). 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 "trendy" and thus to triumph conciliar tradition. That is why we often hear authorities say that the Brotherhood must "support the Catholic Church to reclaim its Tradition." Now, on the one hand, the Catholic Church, without his tradition, could not exist, it would be the Catholic Church. And, secondly, we can no longer speak of "trend" when liberal ideas and Masonic Vatican are "institutionalized" through reforms covering all aspects of the life of the Church: Liturgy Catechism, Ritual, Bible, ecclesiastical tribunals, Higher Education, Magisterium, and especially Canon Law. So we have a structure, an institution different from the Catholic Church. If this were the case, we would members! But it is not us who have left the Catholic Church, they, even if they were able to take control of the formal structure. Regarding the place of the Pope in all this, it must be admitted that there is a mystery, a mystery of iniquity. It remains that we are in the presence of two separate institutions: The Catholic Church founded by Our Lord and the Conciliar Church, which was instigated in no doubt, Lucifer.
           
These are just three small thoughts, but I believe they can shed some light on some aspects of the debate. Now that I've become totally free to speak, you can count on, dear brothers and sisters in Christ the King, on my regular contribution to websites growing movement of opposition to the Rally, a movement that deserves the name, I think, Catholic resistance.

           

Pray for thy servant, as I pray for you.

           

Father Patrick Girouard, SSPX