Author Topic: Letter from Fr. Pinaud (Read 9907 times)

Elsa Zardini · « **Reply #15 on:** June 25, 2013, 06:09:10 AM »

ancien regime, myself, I have forgotten +Tissier time ago. His definition of "fortitude" (un eveque s'est levee) is a wrong one.

Wessex · « **Reply #16 on:** June 25, 2013, 06:11:43 AM »

The treatment of priests that fall foul of 'the management' is well-known. There is not much love lost when it comes to resolving differences. Hundreds of priests must have painful memories of the SSPX, some after giving long service. And I am not just talking about recent times; this has always been a problem. Maybe the priesthood is not for gentle types; one must develop a thick skin and hard knuckles within these organisations.

A priest detained inside a Rothschild castle may sound unreal but it is in keeping with the drama around us. There is great symbolism with this particular event: an inquisition convened within a malevolent setting after a long period of 'persuasion' and 'correct' reflection. Bp. W would send me postcards of the Tower of London to ridicule his exile and one wonders whether the 'Swiss gang' were fed too many fairytales as children and like to simulate medieval solutions. So long as the money keeps pouring in and the pews remain compliant, they will continue to act out their fantasies. Young seminarians and priests may consider all this a hoot but the seniors should start being more scathing if their lives are to have any meaning.

Elsa Zardini · « **Reply #17 on:** June 25, 2013, 06:19:36 AM »

Wessex, "were fed too many fairytales as children". Very kind of you. Unfortunately, I think it is far worse than that. There were two excellent posts here by Ethelred some time ago explaining this. Very convincing.

Elsa Zardini · « **Reply #18 on:** June 25, 2013, 08:27:01 AM »

Ethelred, if you happen to read this one, could you please let us know where your posts re. Mr. Lovey/Lovely are.? Can't find them. Very convincing, IMIgnorantOpinion.

Frances · « **Reply #19 on:** June 25, 2013, 09:50:48 AM »

The behaviors described on this thread are those of a cult. False guilt, public shaming, threats to the victim AND his family and associates, fear, constant surveillance. Beware!

B from A · « **Reply #20 on:** June 25, 2013, 10:12:05 AM »

Quote from: Elsa Zardini

Ethelred, if you happen to read this one, could you please let us know where your posts re. Mr. Lovey/Lovely are.? Can't find them. Very convincing, IMIgnorantOpinion.

Like this?

Quote from: Ethelred

Quote from: JuanDiego
Maybe even the Swiss benefactor was a modernist and pushed Fellay to be a Bishop because of it.

This benefactor was the Swiss-French lawyer Mr Lovey.

His son Philippe Lovey was ordained a priest in the SSPX and later was the Swiss district superior. Mr Lovey senior died the same day when his son was ordained a priest, I think even in the same hour.

I didn't find any indications that Mr. Lovey was a modernist. But if I remember correctly, his son Fr Lovey today is pro Bp Fellay's sellout to New-Rome (which maybe is not postponed).

According to some recent posts here on Cathinfo about the Swiss false "mystic" who influenced Bp Fellay, it was a certain Fr Phillipe Lovey who was connected to this Swiss "mystic" and put her into contact with Bp Fellay around 1995 (+/-). We should have some more accurate information about this but unfortunately there's hardly any available.

Quote from: Ethelred

Quote from: Sugar
He had no intention to nominate a further bishop but it is said that he had to change his mind after a major financial swiss backer insisted that a swiss bishop be also nominated and pushed for Mgr Fellay.

From (SSPX) priestly sources who knew and know the family Lovey, we have the information that your mentioned backer who urged Archbishop Lefebvre to consecrate a Swiss-French bishop (number 4), was the Swiss-French lawyer Mr. Lovey.
I was told Mr. Lovey meant well. Still today we got the mess.

If I remember correctly Mr. Lovey handled financial affairs in or around Ecône, and was the head of a group of benefactors financially supporting Archbishop Lefebvre.

Mr. Lovey's son Philippe Lovey was ordained a priest in the SSPX and later was the Swiss district superior. If I remember correctly, today Fr. Philippe Lovey is supporting Bp Fellay's sellout to Newrome, as do nearly all Swiss SSPX priests unfortunately.

Quote from: Ethelred

Quote from: suger
Quote from: Ethelred
From (SSPX) priestly sources who knew and know the family Lovey, we have the information that your mentioned backer who urged Archbishop Lefebvre to consecrate a Swiss-French bishop (number 4), was the Swiss-French lawyer Mr. Lovey.
I was told Mr. Lovey meant well. Still today we got the mess.

If I remember correctly Mr. Lovey handled financial affairs in or around Ecône, and was the head of a group of benefactors financially supporting Archbishop Lefebvre.

To be more precise: Mr. Lovey (on behalf of his group of benefactors) actually bought the entire Econe for Archbishop Lefebvre.

Quote
Quote
Mr. Lovey's son Philippe Lovey was ordained a priest in the SSPX and later was the Swiss district superior. If I remember correctly, today Fr. Philippe Lovey is supporting Bp Fellay's sellout to Newrome, as do nearly all Swiss SSPX priests unfortunately.

Thank you so much for this key-piece of information, Ethelred!!!!
I was unable to retrieve the name of the financial backer responsible for this. I do believe too he was a nice person, but was naively manipulated by evil-intended money-lenders. Our Lord was right to chase the banksters out of the temple.

You're welcome Suger, and thank you for your good informations.

Quote
Re. ABL, he was in dire need of financial support and had no choice. This is how the banksters got a pull on the Society, as they have pulls on anything they find important in the West.

Well, the situation is becoming clearer now: After Mr. Lovey bought Ecône for the Archbishop, and then some ~20 years later in 1988 Mr. Lovey urged the Archbishop to consecrate also Fr. Fellay because of the "importance of Switzerland for the SSPX" (quoted according to my sources), I think it's understandable that the good Archbishop could have felt obliged to do so because of what Mr. Lovey did for the society...

That's no accusation.

B from A · « **Reply #21 on:** June 25, 2013, 10:22:15 AM »

Sorry; formatting got all messed up. Will try to re-post with corrected format:

Quote from: Elsa Zardini

Ethelred, if you happen to read this one, could you please let us know where your posts re. Mr. Lovey/Lovely are.? Can't find them. Very convincing, IMIgnorantOpinion.

Quote from: Ethelred

Quote from: JuanDiego
Maybe even the Swiss benefactor was a modernist and pushed Fellay to be a Bishop because of it.

This benefactor was the Swiss-French lawyer Mr Lovey.

His son Philippe Lovey was ordained a priest in the SSPX and later was the Swiss district superior. Mr Lovey senior died the same day when his son was ordained a priest, I think even in the same hour.

I didn't find any indications that Mr. Lovey was a modernist. But if I remember correctly, his son Fr Lovey today is pro Bp Fellay's sellout to New-Rome (which maybe is not postponed).

According to some recent posts here on Cathinfo about the Swiss false "mystic" who influenced Bp Fellay, it was a certain Fr Phillipe Lovey who was connected to this Swiss "mystic" and put her into contact with Bp Fellay around 1995 (+/-). We should have some more accurate information about this but unfortunately there's hardly any available.

Quote from: Ethelred

Quote from: Sugar
He had no intention to nominate a further bishop but it is said that he had to change his mind after a major financial swiss backer insisted that a swiss bishop be also nominated and pushed for Mgr Fellay.

From (SSPX) priestly sources who knew and know the family Lovey, we have the information that your mentioned backer who urged Archbishop Lefebvre to consecrate a Swiss-French bishop (number 4), was the Swiss-French lawyer Mr. Lovey.
I was told Mr. Lovey meant well. Still today we got the mess.

If I remember correctly Mr. Lovey handled financial affairs in or around Ecône, and was the head of a group of benefactors financially supporting Archbishop Lefebvre.

Mr. Lovey's son Philippe Lovey was ordained a priest in the SSPX and later was the Swiss district superior. If I remember correctly, today Fr. Philippe Lovey is supporting Bp Fellay's sellout to Newrome, as do nearly all Swiss SSPX priests unfortunately.

Quote from: Ethelred

Quote from: suger
Quote from: Ethelred
From (SSPX) priestly sources who knew and know the family Lovey, we have the information that your mentioned backer who urged Archbishop Lefebvre to consecrate a Swiss-French bishop (number 4), was the Swiss-French lawyer Mr. Lovey.
I was told Mr. Lovey meant well. Still today we got the mess.

If I remember correctly Mr. Lovey handled financial affairs in or around Ecône, and was the head of a group of benefactors financially supporting Archbishop Lefebvre.

To be more precise: Mr. Lovey (on behalf of his group of benefactors) actually bought the entire Econe for Archbishop Lefebvre.

Quote
Quote
Mr. Lovey's son Philippe Lovey was ordained a priest in the SSPX and later was the Swiss district superior. If I remember correctly, today Fr. Philippe Lovey is supporting Bp Fellay's sellout to Newrome, as do nearly all Swiss SSPX priests unfortunately.

Thank you so much for this key-piece of information, Ethelred!!!!
I was unable to retrieve the name of the financial backer responsible for this. I do believe too he was a nice person, but was naively manipulated by evil-intended money-lenders. Our Lord was right to chase the banksters out of the temple.

You're welcome Suger, and thank you for your good informations.

Quote
Re. ABL, he was in dire need of financial support and had no choice. This is how the banksters got a pull on the Society, as they have pulls on anything they find important in the West.

Well, the situation is becoming clearer now: After Mr. Lovey bought Ecône for the Archbishop, and then some ~20 years later in 1988 Mr. Lovey urged the Archbishop to consecrate also Fr. Fellay because of the "importance of Switzerland for the SSPX" (quoted according to my sources), I think it's understandable that the good Archbishop could have felt obliged to do so because of what Mr. Lovey did for the society...

That's no accusation.

Unbrandable · « **Reply #22 on:** June 25, 2013, 10:36:04 AM »

Quote from: Elsa Zardini

Zeitun, what bothers me is that these good priests don't have a mother, father, any family member, any friend, explaining to them that they need to run away. It is so obvious. I am doing my best with the ones I know or with their friends (who think likewise) to convince them. But it would seem no success.

It is obvious. I don't understand why he doesn't leave. What has he got to lose?

Elsa Zardini · « **Reply #23 on:** June 25, 2013, 11:15:05 AM »

"B from A" and "unbrandable". Thank you so much. The thing is somebody FULLY of Monseñor Lefebvre's thinking and hence the Religion of God Trino (very important to other the word "trino") explains this to the French good priests. This is crucial. Like it or not. What can I do?

Unbrandable · « **Reply #24 on:** June 25, 2013, 11:48:33 AM »

Quote from: Elsa Zardini

"B from A" and "unbrandable". Thank you so much. The thing is somebody FULLY of Monseñor Lefebvre's thinking and hence the Religion of God Trino (very important to other the word "trino") explains this to the French good priests. This is crucial. Like it or not. What can I do?

Exactly Elsa Zardini. Father Pinaud could do far more good rallying the Resistance in France, rather than sitting day after day in his "prison."

Elsa Zardini · « **Reply #25 on:** June 25, 2013, 02:22:14 PM »

So, “Are the French Priests listening”. No, except for Fathers Faure (worth 1,000,000 of them, naturally), Rioult, Salenave, Pivert, etc. “Why? They should know better!” Because 1) of ABL’s angelism (explained in two ECs), and 2) “nadie es profeta en su tierra” (Our Lord, Monseñor Lefebvre, Monseñor Williamson, Father Faure, Father Trincado, and the other Resistants ones). So, what can be done? May be Matto (and others like him) is the answer for this precise second.

Now, such as I see it (ignorant), the sedevacantism does not get along with the latin world. Bad Popes since juan el bueno (and throughout the convulsive history of the Church): yes. No Popes: no. It is something in our blood, may be, and might explain the popularity of +W (non-sedevacantist from reading/listening to his words) in Brazil and Mexico. After the inminent (in my opinion) chastiment, the humble (to say the least) Church will study the subject (as has always done) and will pronounce.

Example: at the first visit of Monseñor Lefebvre to Argentina (197.?) many trads ran away from him -my father included, although later clarified- because of a bad translation from latin into spanish by Octavio Sequeiros (our good friend; now deceased), of a dispute in latin between Monseñor Lefebvre (non-sedevacantist) and Carlos Disandro (sedevacantist), making Monseñor Lefebvre appear as sedevacantist.

Nevertheless: I am going to try to "make friends" :sign-surrender: with sedevacantists, at this second. Can’t tell you the next second.

Raphaela · « **Reply #26 on:** June 25, 2013, 05:09:06 PM »

Quote from: ancien regime

Fr. Pinaud decided to play through this farce of a "trial."

The clue to this is here. He's not being held against his will, which would be illegal. He's doing it voluntarily so he can put forward his own opinion at the "trial". The other priest "arrested" with him (Fr. Rioult?) decided not to be tried and left.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #27 on:** June 26, 2013, 01:06:33 PM »

Quote from: Elsa Zardini

"B from A" and "unbrandable". Thank you so much. The thing is somebody FULLY of Monseñor Lefebvre's thinking and hence the Religion of God Trino (very important to other the word "trino") explains this to the French good priests. This is crucial. Like it or not. What can I do?

Tell me if I'm wrong, but after reading this 5 times, it seems
that you must be trying to say the following:

The thing is, that somebody FULLY in cooperation with Monseñor Lefebvre's thinking, and hence with the Religion of the Triune God (it is very important to utter the word, "Trinity") should explain this[/b]* to the good French priests.

*Even so, I still have no idea what "this" is that
you're talking about. You think it is crucial that "this"
is explained to the good French priests, but I do not
know what "this" is that should be explained to them.

And, who are the "good French priests" to whom you refer?

Matto · « **Reply #28 on:** June 26, 2013, 01:10:30 PM »

So he is waiting to be tried by a kangaroo court of his enemies. This is absurd. But if I was him I would wait to see the trial too.

Elsa Zardini · « **Reply #29 on:** June 26, 2013, 01:57:08 PM »

Yes Neil. Rather telegraphic.

"French good Priests": the 37 or similar number (avec l' immaculee; la sapiniere).

"This": the reproduction by B to A of Ethelred's and others related posts here in this thread, for these good priests to understand that they should not be scared of leaving the ExSSPX now (avec l' immaculee has an excellent article on this subject giving them all sorts of support), that this sell out has been going on for a long time, probably since Monseñor Lefebvre passed away, that they should read +W's Letter to Friends and Benefactors of 1 February 2001 (williamsonletters dot blogspot dot com) where everything is oulined. These explanations might (I don't know; "no tengo la bola de cristal"!), but might give them the certainty that they (the 37) are doing the correct thing by running away now that all this sell out is coming to light. As time goes by, I am afraid they might loosen. Transfers/non transfers.

Might be wrong, naturally. I am not religious nor knowledgeable. And, anyway, to whom are they going to listen to? Don't know...