On the 6th of September this year 2018, Mr Ken Bayliss, a practicing Traditional Catholic, died in hospital 2 hours after being refused the Sacrament of Extreme Unction by Father Taouk of the Brisbane SSPX Parish. Father Pepping of that same parish refused to announce his death in the bulletin asking for prayers.

I am writing because Father Taouk is purposefully, out of a spirit of revenge, putting souls in danger by refusing sacraments on numerous occasions.

If this is in fact the case, Father Taouk should be suspended from the priesthood and excommunicated.  That's how grave a charge this is.  But is it true?  If it's not true, the accuser should be excommunicated.

Fr. Taouk never got the memo -- the latest strategy of the SSPX is "no martyrdoms" or "no heroes" , getting people to come back to the SSPX chapels, no more expulsions, and get as many of those frogs back in the pot as possible -- time will do the rest.

The diabolical Communists share this strategy, incidentally. They would rather discredit you, make you look horrible, frame you as a rapist, date rapist, pedophile, make you fade away into obscurity, or something along those lines. That way, even your supporters hate you. They don't want heroes and martyrs.
The devil knows that "the blood of martyrs is the seed of Christians".

Likewise, the abuse and dry martyrdom of faithful Trads is the seed of more Trads, a.k.a. Resistance supporters.

But I must say, at least Fr. Taouk is honest about how he feels, and consistent with his beliefs. He believes that the Resistance is evil, there is nothing to resist, etc. and so if someone misses a single Mass, he thinks they committed a mortal sin. Maybe he believes that not attending Mass is a public act (that people can see) and so it's a "public sin"? Who knows.

It is refreshing in a way to see some honesty in a priest, even if his zeal is misplaced and happens to hurt some Trads. At least we all know where he stands. He's not two-faced!

A couple points for Ladislaus and anyone else having thoughts similar to what he expressed:

1. The CathInfo member who started this thread is NOT the actual author of the text.
2. The author of the text signed his full name and address. He is quite serious about this charge. This is not an anonymous, Internet keyboard warrior drive-by shooting of someone's reputation. If he's just distorting or slandering Fr. Taouk, he's sure bold by placing his name to it!
3. The full names of all of the victims of "sacrament denial" are given. Again, this doesn't sound like anonymous rumor or someone trying to create FUD (fear-uncertainty-doubt) about Fr. Taouk. Anyone local could look into these details themselves and verify (or disprove!) the allegations.


I understand your point, Ladislaus, and I touched on a couple of those points in my post above.

However, to use a common expression, "it doesn't look good".

I'm from Brisbane and I do confirm this report ! Fr. T. is known for this. I'm an opinionist S.V. and my best mate ( definitely anti S.V. ) is most active in the local resistance group. I've no dog in this fight, but Fr. T. has a forceful personality, and his behavior can be reprehensible at times.