.

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=22261&min=70#p3

The post on the Timeline just before the one above is the Frs. Pfeiffer
and Hewko conference of July 13th, on the AFD (Doctrinal Declaration,
sometimes mistaken for the 'preamble' because the wrong word has
been used).  

Posted just before that entry is the article by the great Fr. Girouard
named "Perception" and which I had posted and linked in the
Resistance Sermons sticky thread here, just one month ago, in fact.

That was before I realized that the great Fr. Girouard really deserves
his own thread up here above the Seraphim, as it were.  


It goes something like this..  
One,,,, two,,,, a-one, two, three, four...............


.

A most excellent and timely article by the formidable Fr. Patrick
Girouard - takes on the question of - Why are the Menzingen-
denizens pursuing this path of normalization with modernist
Rome?  What could be their motivation?  Why do this?*

He endeavors to 'shed some light' on the topic, and true to
form, he does not fall short of his mark.  Many thanks for this
great article from us to you, Fr. Girouard!

*A topic not unrelated would be, why has the leadership of the
Society tried so desperately to CLAIM that they are NOT in hot
pursuit of this normalization? But it seems to me that the answer
to that question is right here!  They are desperate BECAUSE of
this article, and perhaps others like it, that is, the Resistance
has been doing a spiritual work of mercy to wit:  To Instruct the
Ignorant.  And the devil hates it when the ignorant are
instructed!  Please Note: The murmurings from Fr. Morgan in the
British District that he is due soon to make the announcement of
H.E. Fellay's denouncement of his own AFD (Doctrinal Declaration)
came the very day that this article, below, was posted on
Sacraficium.org! (That would be Fr. Morgan's Denouncement-
Announcement - coming soon to a venue-near-you!)
 

*******UPDATE!!********
We have it on very reliable authority that we should not hold our
breath for Fr. Morgan to deliver on his promise.  For the little
Denouncement Pronouncement Announcement that he had made
was apparently a big flop.  He probably got his fanny tanned for
even going that far.  After all, he doesn't want to be sent to the
South Pole to evangelize the penguins.  So he is pulling in the
sails and battening down the hatches, lest he be caught unawares
in a typhoon, sudden squall, hurricane or whatever it is.  The same
storm found on different points of the globe has a different name,
you know, so you have to consider where HEBF is located to know
what to call his latest tantrum.   HAHAHAHAHA

But seriously, speaking of "storms at sea",,,,,,,,,,,, don't miss the
discussion thread for "In or Out of the Sea" here.









Perception (25 June 2013)

When I talk with people, many ask me the same question: “But, Father, why is Bishop Fellay doing this? Why is he, and the other Superiors as well, pursuing this new strategy towards Rome?”

 

Of course, to be able to answer with a complete and absolute certitude, I would need to be God himself! But, as He has chosen me to become His minister here on earth, I do have to try my best to provide some light on the matter.

 

From what I can gather from diverse sources, the superiors of the Society, and those who follow them, believe that the obtaining of a “canonical normalization”, of an “official recognition” by the Roman authorities, would be a means to reach more souls and to be able to help them better to reach their eternal salvation. (They seem to forget that these poor souls have already nine “rallied” communities to turn to...). For Bishop Fellay and his followers, such a “regularization” would also repair an injustice perpetrated against the Society of St. Pius X. These two motives seem, in themselves, to be good ones, and worthy of praises. Good people are indeed attracted by good motives.

 

Before to deal with the first motive, which is more the subject of this editorial, let me dispatch quickly the question of the reparation of an “injustice” done to us: Since when does the fact of being rejected by bad people has become an injustice to good people? To have been rejected by heretics and perverts doesn’t sound too bad to me. I would even say they did me a favor! The Modernists and perverts in Rome didn’t take away my being a Catholic, they just gave me the joy of receiving one of the Beatitudes revealed by Our Lord, that of suffering persecution for justice’s sake! Why would I want this beatitude taken away from me?

 

Let us now proceed with our argumentation: If we were to analyze both motives a bit seriously, we would understand that they have a sandy foundation, and that they cannot stand scrutiny. Indeed, those motives stem from a desire that the SSPX may one day be well perceived by people belonging to the mainstream “Church”. In other words, all the crisis we have been living for the last 15 years or so, since the foundation of the “Groupe de Réflexion Entre Catholiques” (GREC), is based on a question of PERCEPTION, that is to say: On how other people see us.

 

This “Group of Reflection Among Catholics”, founded in 1997 by, among others, Fr. Alain Lorans (in charge of DICI) and Novus Ordo Fr. Michel Lelong, has the official goal of bringing about the reconciliation of the SSPX with conciliar Rome. Fr. Lorans has founded it with the blessing of Bishop Fellay, and he has kept him informed of their work. I have the book written by Fr. Lelong, where he details the history of the group. Among other things, he says that the GREC has suggested to the Society to ask for, and to the Roman authorities to grant, two signs of good will that would help achieve a future reconciliation: 1- The “freedom” of the Old Mass, 2- The lifting of the “excommunications”. The Grec also suggested that the SSPX stops: 1- To criticize harshly the Roman authorities; [and stops] 2- To reject Vatican II as a whole. We know what happened afterwards. The Society asked for the two signs of “good will” from Rome, and it has also changed its style of argumentation. (About this change, I refer you to my sermon of June 2 2013, on the “branding” of the Society). It is interesting to note that, while the whole question of “reconciliation” is based on perception, the means proposed to achieve it are themselves founded on perception.

 

Indeed, we all know that the Old Mass never needed to be ‘liberated”, since the bull “Quo Primum” gave a perpetual permission to celebrate it, notwithstanding what Novus Ordo bishops may say; that the “excommunications” were never valid; and that the new style of argumentation of the Society is the result of the wish to not be perceived as “bitter”, “harsh”, “disobedient”, etc. But, even if they knew all this, Bishop Fellay and his followers, somewhere along the line, have become afraid of the negative perception the mainstream “Catholics” got from these three elements. They started to think that such a negative perception was an obstacle to the salvation of these poor souls. Therefore, to remove this obstacle, to obtain a good end, they have decided to follow the GREC’s suggestions, which is to say: They have chosen bad means to attain a good end. Everybody with a minimal knowledge of Catechism knows that this is never morally permissible.

 

Moreover, by asking Rome to grant those two “signs of good will”, the leaders of the Society have purposefully acted externally in a manner that contradicted what they believed internally to be true. They therefore increased the confusion in the poor souls they wanted to “save”, because they acted publicly AS IF the Old Mass had been forbidden, and AS IF the excommunications had been valid, and AS IF the Conciliar Rome and Pontiff, and the Council itself, were not that bad anymore. In other words, they have been, for all practical purposes, liars and hypocrites.

 

Later on, Bishop Fellay and his two Assistants, forming what is called the General Council, have presented to Rome a Doctrinal Declaration, dated April 15th 2012, which is a monument of the same kind of hypocrisy. It is a docuмent that tries, by means of subtlety in the choice of words and expressions, to be acceptable both to the Modernists and to Traditionalists. That is why Bishop Fellay himself said repeatedly that our acceptance of this text would depend on our state of mind while reading it (I refer to his expression: “pink or dark tinted glasses”). As far as we know, the General Council has not yet sent another official docuмent to Rome, to say that it revokes this Doctrinal Declaration, and it therefore still represents the official position of the Society on these questions, notwithstanding any declaration to the contrary done in sermons or conferences. Such utterances have indeed no official or juridical value whatsoever, and are only another proof that the leaders of the Society are being hypocritical, not only towards the mainstream “Catholics”, but also with their own faithful who are paying their bills.

 

Another striking example of hypocrisy is the Declaration of the 2012 General Chapter of the Society, and the six “conditions” to a practical agreement. The Superiors pretend to have recovered the unity in the Society, while, in practice, that so-called “unity” has been reached by the expulsion of any dissenting voice, including that of one of the four Bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre. It is a unity based on fear and on lies. Those who know that the Society is doing wrong fear punishment, and those who think it is doing right have been deceived by the sophisms explained above. Moreover, to affirm that the six “conditions”, weak in themselves, could protect us is to refuse to see the reality in Rome, and to forget what happened to the nine Traditional Communities who tried this before. This is tantamount to voluntary intellectual blindness.

 

What we hope that everybody could realize, is that Bishop Fellay and his followers are doing [making] the same mistake than [as] clergymen did at Vatican II: They found their new strategy on a question of PERCEPTION. Vatican II has indeed been an attempt to improve the perception outsiders had of the Catholic Church. The failed experiment of the Conciliar Church should have prevented the Society leaders from falling into that same trap, but, since when do children learn from the experience of previous generations?

 

What can we do to help stop this non-sense? I think we have to get out of this system of hypocrisy and of that cycle of fear. We have to stand up for the truth, no matter the perception others may have of us, and no matter the punishments. What converted the Pagans in the first centuries of the Church was not Christians who tried to be well thought of. It was the constancy of those who were ready to give their lives to uphold their convictions. Therefore my dear friends, LET US RESIST OPENLY AND STRONGLY!

Abbé Patrick Girouard

    Français

Copyright © Sacrificium, 2013.