Bp. Fellay, “Francis is all mixed up”

excerpt from the Conference given by Bp. Fellay

8 October 2016 — Port-Marly, France

(underlines are ours for emphasis)

Moreover, with what the pope is doing, there have been protests by cardinals on moral questions, on the question of marriage, on the question of communion for divorced-and-remarried persons. A certain number of them have clearly and openly said that they refuse, declaring: “No, that will not be done.” Then there are the African bishops, who have clearly said that there is no question of giving communion to divorced-and-remarried persons. This is a reaction that is saying no to the supreme authority. Which we have been doing for fifty years. This is becoming extremely interesting. We are no longer the only ones.

Then some people say: “Careful! Careful! If you make an agreement, afterwards they will silence you.” But that is passé! That’s over! There are others who are talking. We are no longer the only ones. We no longer have a monopoly on protests. They are not very numerous, but this number is increasing. And then, from time to time, I receive letters. Like this one: I will read it to you in English because it is an image: “Stick to your guns. Always stick to your guns.” This means: Keep your hands on your revolvers. Hold them firmly. In other words: “Defend yourselves. Always. And refuse to compromise in these matters that do not really pertain to the substance of the faith: religious liberty, ecumenism, dialogue with non-Christian religions. There are many of us in the hierarchy who think and believe in what you are doing about these questions.” It is a bishop who wrote that to me. He does not write “I”, he writes that there are many of “us”. He wrote other things too that I dare not read to you, they are so laudatory, but here is the gist: “We need voices that tell us the limits of our freedom in those areas.” He says that the Church, which teaches the truth, is now lost in the gray areas, in vagueness. “Come to our aid.” And also: “Do not let go of anything, continue like this, we need it!” This is new! There was nothing like this before! The bishops used to tell us: obviously there are problems, but at the end of the day…. And here they are telling us: “Resist, we need it!” Actually they do not speak too loud because they know very well that if they do, they will be cutting off their own heads.

But they are working silently, they are working to reestablish the old Mass, like one archbishop who told me: “I have a generation of priests that is lost. You can’t do anything with them. What do I do, then? I take care of the young ones.” And he gave me two criteria: priestly formation in theology is the Summa of Saint Thomas, and in spirituality, in liturgy, it is the old Mass. I am not telling you their names because we do not want to burn out these prelates, but there are several of them. I discover some, just like that, by surprise, and there are a certain number of them! And these are young bishops! And some of them were appointed by Pope Francis! He is not just appointing bad ones! He is all mixed up, like his whole attitude, which has also increased the general confusion. But it is extremely interesting to see that there is this movement, and I am certain that it will no longer stop. Why? Because these bishops see where the truth is, and they will not give in. They are annoyed, they are cornered, because they are in the system, but they will no longer give in. Just like these priests who have discovered the old Mass, they will do all that they can, they are annoyed, cornered, but they will keep it. These are skirmishes that have been won.

The new FSSPX logo?

Fr. Pierre Roy’s Open Letter

Open Letter to the Faithful of Quebec

and the Maritime Provinces

Lakeville, June 3rd, 2016
Feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus​

« The night is far advanced; the day is at hand. Let us therefore lay aside the works of darkness, and put on the armor of light. Let us walk becomingly as in the day. » Roman, 13; 12-13

Dear brethren,

This letter is to notify you of my decision to leave the Society of St. Piux X. In spite of my sermon on April 17th last, many of you will be surprised to learn of my departure. I hope then that these lines will show more clearly the reasons why I am leaving.

I would like to say first that I did not wish that my sermon of April 17th be published urbi et orbi and that I myself did all I could to prevent its diffusion. I was preaching merely for the chapel of Montreal, that portion of the Lord’s flock entrusted to me by my superior. With that said, the Lord has willed that it be otherwise. Blessed be his Holy Name!

I was born and raised in the arms of the Society. I owe everything to the work of Archbishop Lefebvre. This is why I am well aware of the gravity of the action I take before God and before yourselves, and aware also of the duty one day to account for myself before the Tribunal of the Just Judge.

For several years already the authorities of the Society - they no longer cloak themselves - have been organizing a reunification with Apostate Rome. Is it legitimate to place oneself under authorities who do not have our Faith, or to accept from them a recognition, so long as they demand “no compromise”?[1]I leave you to judge of it with these words of Pope Pius XI : “Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ's teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him : God speed you.’ For which reason, since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith. Who then can conceive a Christian Federation, the members of which retain each his own opinions and private judgment, even in matters which concern the object of faith, even though they be repugnant to the opinions of the rest? And in what manner, We ask, can men who follow contrary opinions, belong to one and the same Federation of the faithful?” Mortalium Animos

You also know, dearest faithful, that the Society has always called it illegitimate to align oneself with those who have removed themselves from Tradition and no longer profess the Faith in its integrity. Why, afterall, have we permitted ourselves these last 30 years to criticize the Fraternity of Saint Peter? Why have we more recently criticized Campos? Why did we repudiate the agreement reached in 2006 by the Institute of the Good Shepherd? Having recently asserted to a superior that it will be necessary for us to cease criticizing these communitites, I received the following response: “Ah, but we will continue to criticize them!” I then asked why, by what principle. I received no further reply.

No, either we have been wrong since 1988 and even since 1975, or we have been wrong since 2012. Unless we too adopt a subjective conception of the truth, and what was true in 1988 is no longer. A last solution - by means of which seemingly anything can be justified : the situation has changed. We are witness, says our superior general, to a turning point in the history of the Church : they no longer want to impose the Council upon us; Pope Francis “appears to be someone who would like to see the whole world saved, that everyone have access to God,”[2] he continues. Did Jesus not say, “If you love me, keep my commandments”? (John 14:15) One may seriously ask himself if Pope Francis, who practically denies the commandments before the whole world, truly seeks to save souls. On the other hand, did Archbishop Lefebvre not write in his Spiritual Journey, his testament to his priests, “It is the strict duty of every priest and layman wishing to remain Catholic to separate himself clearly from the Conciliar Church, for so long as she does not profess the tradition of the Church’s Magisterium and of the Catholic Faith,”[3] as we were reminded by Bishop Tissier de Mallerais not so long ago?

Some will say, “It is not yet done. Wait until it is done!” This is what I myself said to many among you, my dear faithful, for some years, hoping and believing sincerely that the authorities of our Society would turn back. But I must face the evidence that they have not. Day after day, declaration after declaration, they continue to inoculate into the souls of faithful and priest alike a pernicious error, which holds it legitimate to seek from the Conciliar authority a recognition and jurisdiction that is made exceedingly dubious by this authority’s daily betrayal of the Faith. This error, which insinuates itself in the spirits of each, causes even priests known for their doctrinal intransigence (this being a virtue) to become less and less combative to the point where they will soon be ready to betray everything.

This is accomplished in a gradual way and without us realizing the ambiguities introduced. It began by convincing us that a Motu Proprio which put the Sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ on an equal footing with, and even subordinate to, what Archbishop Lefebvre very justly called the “mass of Luther,” was welcome and beneficial. We thanked the conciliar authorities for this gesture, though timidly maintaining that solely the mass of St. Pius V is legitimate. It was a first step, or perhaps a first misstep. They say to us, “Does the Motu Proprio not produce marvellous results?” But since when have practical results been more important than the purity of the doctrine of Christ? Since when has truth profited from human compromise? “Do not do evil that there may come good,” the Apostle told us. (Romans 3:8)

Next they convinced us it was acceptable to sing a solemn Te Deum for the publication of a document which, in lifting the “excommunications” of the four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre, restated in principle that our bishops had been well and truly excommunicated. This decree lifting the false sentence brought against our bishops is ultimately nothing but a fresh condemnation of the actions of Archbishop Lefebvre, whom we have still the insolence to call “our revered founder.”

Not putting in practice the advice of St. John nor that of Our Lord Jesus Christ (“Beware of false prophets,” Matthew 7:15), in discussion after discussion, and meeting after meeting, we eventually silence our suspicions, which are more than legitimate and healthy in the face of persons who deny the Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. This is how our superior has become, according to Pope Francis, a man “with whom one can dialogue,” with whom he who currently directs the subversion and the destruction of the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ believes he can do “good work.[4]” Is there any wonder then that they happily grant us jurisdiction for confessions (which was never lacking)? How can we claim that we are asking for nothing, but that Rome gives everything? Have we not just recently asked for the doubtful jurisdiction of conciliar Rome with respect to the other sacraments? No, truly, we ask for nothing! Rome, who scourges Our Lord Jesus Christ, wishes us well! This is rather worrying: which side are we on?

The new direction of our Society is imposed on priests, on many priests who have never desired it. Enforced silences, transfers, promotions, trials, threats, promises, exclusions, all become justifiable when they work do defend the “position of the Society,” which is in fact - as always in a revolution - the position of a minority which has taken power and which deftly manipulates the passive majority. Following my sermon of April 17th, besides the desperate reactions of certain colleagues, they ordered me to be silent. They wished me to swear on my priesthood (!) to speak no more from the pulpit on the question of an accord with apostate Rome. “You have many other subjects on which you can speak,” they told me. Naturally I am conscious that the principal subject of preaching is not the joining of our Society to Rome, but the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ. But I would note - you are my witnesses, dear brothers - that that was the first time in five years of ministry that I had spoken on this question from the pulpit. I refused to be silenced. However, I promised to warn my superiors before treating the subject from the pulpit again. “If you intend to speak of it again,” they told me, ‘You will have the right to confess and to say mass, but you cannot preach. Otherwise, leave the Society and say what you wish.” That is what I am doing, brethren, because a priest must preach and alert his flock to the wolves who threaten to devour them.

I have no absolute certainty that the Society will join itself to Rome. Nevertheless I have moral certainty that they will do so, given the clear, express, and reiterated will of both Rome and the Society to arrive at an arrangement, and given also the absorption these last months of the last episcopal voices which firmly opposed it. That God preserve us from this tragedy - this will, in spite of my departure, continue to be my fervent prayer!

In the meanwhile, having on the day of my baptism renounced not only Satan and his works, but also his seductions, I cannot accept that my immortal soul be sold to the conciliar sect, nor accept even that it be put up for sale. Consequently, the fact that the superiors of the Society have shown on numerous occasions their amenability to a practical accord (in the absence of Rome’s conversion) suffices for me to take this step, prudently, not before having prayed at length and taken counsel with wise priests. There is no question for me whatsoever of remaining silent about what is being done. I have kept silence too long, hoping and assuring you, brethren, that the Society superiors would eventually open their eyes. But the more time passed, the more was I forced to accept the evidence that those who lead us do not intend to turn back.

I must confess that to speak openly of the treachery we are living through is a very delicate business if one remains within the Society. Which is why I am leaving: for the ability to preach the truth in its integrity, since I must someday answer for each of the souls entrusted to me. To keep silent was no longer possible without making myself guilty before God.

In the past I have severely criticized those we call the “Resistance,” but whom others call the “Subversion,” and still others, “Fidelity.” I must say that besides the fact that I did not at that time see things as clearly as (by the grace of God) I now do, I was reacting mainly to the misbehaviour of certain colleagues who visited our province and who, though clear-sighted, were rather cavalier, much to the discredit of the courageous stance taken by those who refused the betrayal imposed on us. I will try with God’s grace to avoid the attitudes I have denounced and to devote my energy to rebuilding rather than to badgering those who wish to place us in Rome’s hands. With that said, to denounce errors and deceptions remains a necessary duty which with God’s aid I will fulfill.

Many clear-sighted priests do not dare for now to act against the imposition. I believe the principal reason restraining them is the fear of breaking the unity of the institutions that have with such difficulty been built up. How accept that in dividing the faithful, we risk contributing to the closure of a chapel? The reply is that faithful priests are not the origin of the division brewing in our ranks, but the very authorities of the Society, who would have us believe that we are participating in a turning point in the situation of the Church, when in fact it is not the situation that has changed, but only their minds. Dear brothers, if the directors of the Society continue to sow distrust and confusion by their mistaken ideas, the division will swell, and it may become necessary to burst it open in our region for the common good.

For my part, I would that the Lord spare me from having prematurely to break the unity of the few chapels we have in French Canada. This is why I have decided to remain for the moment in the Maritimes. The faithful in these parts lack frequent access to the true Mass and the true Sacraments. They are mostly without spiritual help. They raise their children without the support of the Church. Therefore I thought it best to keep to this region and concentrate my efforts on developing these small groups that have so little access to the sacraments, hoping one day to return these communities to the hands of the Society, only made larger and more fervent by the grace of God and by my ministry. For this is my greatest hope: that the Society turns back in a clear and unequivocal manner, that I may return these missions to it, and that I may myself re-enter its ranks, profiting anew from the priestly fellowship offered there. I cling to no illusions, but miracles are always possible...

However, it remains clear that the more the situation deteriorates, the more it will become necessary to tend to souls in Quebec who feel betrayed and deceived. My hope is that more priests arise and come carrying the truth to those who desire it for themselves and their children. Because while it is obvious that the Society continues to disburse the help of the sacraments - of which it would be illegitimate to deprive oneself without very grave reason - it is no small thing in this crisis of the Church to have access to sound preaching and to continue to see clearly through the painful events we are experiencing.

Begging you pray for me, I also assure you, dear brethren, of my prayers at the altar and of my blessing.


“Serve ye the Lord with gladness!” Ps. 99

Father Pierre Roy
Mission Notre-Dame-de-Joie
1974 Route 134
Lakeville, E1H 1A6
New Brunswick

[1] http://www.dici.org/en/documents/interview-with-bishop-bernard-fellay-for-the-national-catholic-register/

[2] http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/video-sspxs-bishop-fellay-speaks-exclusively-to-the-register

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqRd7914Jb0

[4] http://www.la-croix.com/Religion/Pape/INTERVIEW-Pope-Francis-2016-05-17-1200760633

(to read, right click on the image and open it in a new window or click here for the pdf)

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

Fr. Chazal on 'bishop' Ambrose or 'bishop' Mickey Mouse

...fun and games be happening in Pfeifferville

(aka Boston), Kentucky

Pablo 'the Mexican Exorcist' introduced this 'bishop' to Fr. Pfeiffer and Fr. Hewko.

Below is Mr. William Edward Moran's or Mr. Ambrose W. Moran's or Mr. Ambrose E. Moran's or 'bishop' Mickey Mouse's or  'bishop' Moran's or 'bishop' Ambrose's video whichever one nomenclature prefers to call him by, we at Call Me Jorge... are simply confused which name is it?

Fr. Hewko interviews 'bishop' Ambrose

the sermon of 'bishop' Ambrose

Fellay comments on the Society's position with Rome in new interview

Bp. Fellay, in a May 2015 sermon, made reference to his being appointed a judge by Rome.  Then La Stampa's Vatican Insider, confirmed that this was indeed true. In this recent interview by Anne le Pape,  Bp. Fellay's interview: a work of the Church!, Bp. Fellay clarifies his remarks.  We post it in its entirety below.

Bp. Fellay's interview: a work of the Church!

by Anne le Pape

27 June 2015

On the occasion of the blessing of the bells for the chapel of the Saint-Michel de La Martinerie school in Chateauroux, Bishop Fellay gave Presentan update on the situation of the Society of St. Pius X, of which he is the Superior General.

In an interview with Fideliter in 2001, you mentioned the "movement of profound sympathy from the young clergy for the Society." Has this movement grown, especially with the motu proprio in 2007?

"Without a doubt! The motu proprio gave this movement a new impetus. And it is important to insist upon Benedict XVI's interest for the liturgy in general. He truly wished to put the entire traditional liturgy, not only the Mass, at the disposition of the priests and the faithful; this did not happen because there was too much opposition. But the young priests identify with this liturgy, precisely because it is timeless. The Church lives in eternity. The liturgy does also too, which is why it is always young. Close to God, it is outside of time. So it is no surprise that the baptismal character makes this harmony resound even in souls that have never known the liturgy. And the way the young priests react when they discover this liturgy is moving: they have the impression a treasure has been hidden from them."

The Society was officially recognized as Catholic by the State of Argentina, with the help of Cardinal Bergoglio, who has since become Pope Francis. Does this have a purely administrative importance or is it more revealing?

"First of all, it has a juridical and administrative effect with no implications as far as the Society's general relations with--to put it simply--the official Church are concerned. But the secondary effects are not easy to evaluate correctly. There is no doubt that Pope Francis, then Cardinal Bergoglio, had promised to help the Society obtain the Argentinian State's recognition of our society as Catholic and that he kept his promise. So we have no choice but to think that he does consider us Catholic."

Along the same lines, you were made a judge of first instance by the Vatican for the trial of a Society priest. Can that be seen as a sign of good will?

"That is nothing new; it has been the case for over ten years. It is indeed a sign of good will and of common sense. It is something that can be observed in the Roman Church throughout her whole history: her realism, her capacity to go beyond canonical and juridical problems in order to find solutions to very real problems."

In your Letter to Friends and Benefactors, you mentioned "contradictory messages" coming from Rome. What do you mean by that?

"I was thinking of the way in which a society that was becoming closer to Tradition was treated--or rather mistreated: the Franciscans of the Immaculate. And of the different ways we are treated by the different Roman authorities: the Congregation for Religious, for example, still considers us schismatic (in 2011, they declared a priest who joined our Society excommunicated), but that is not the case with other congregations, or the pope himself, as we just said."

"Pessimistic", "closed to others", "thinking that only the faithful of the Society will be saved": you are sometimes referred to in these terms. How would you respond? What is the missionary spirit in your eyes?

"I do not recognize myself in these quips. Firmness in doctrine is indeed necessary, for the Faith is not up for negotiation. The Faith is, as a whole, given by God, and we have no right to pick and choose among the revealed truths. Today, reminders of these requirements are unwelcome, as has always been more or less the case. The expression 'the fight of the Faith' is part of the history of the Church. The missionary has to make the voice of the Faith heard outside, and at the same time seek to strengthen those who already have it. We cannot speak only to the faithful of the Society. The torch lights up the world, the light of the faith shines with warmth. The Faith must be borne by charity: that is how I see the missionary."

A few weeks ago, the Society's seminaries were visited by Cardinal Brandmuller and Bishop Schneider. These visits are a public connection with the "official Church". Isn't that vital?

"The link with the Church is vital. The manifestations of this connection can vary. The dates and places for these visits were left up to me; the Vatican chose the names. I chose the seminaries because they seemed to me to be the most eloquent and representative for the bishops."

What were the first reactions of these bishops?

"They were very satisfied. 'You are normal people,' they told us...which goes to show the reputation we have! They congratulated us on the quality of our seminarians. There is no doubt that their conclusion after this first closer contact was that we are a work of the Church."

Have you been in contact with any bishops who support you discreetly?

"Of course! When we see that priests are coming closer to us today and entering into contact with us, we can easily conclude that the same is true on the higher level..."

In the 2001 interview we already mentioned, you declared: "If there is any chance at all that our contacts with Rome could bring back a little more Tradition in the Church, I think we should seize the opportunity." Is that still your position?

"That remains our position, even if we cannot say it is easy, especially because of the open dissensions within the Vatican itself. These relations are delicate, but our point of view remains valid as is confirmed by the facts. It is a discreet work, being accomplished in the midst of strong opposition. Some are working in one direction, others in the opposite direction."

Is the Society's role as a counterweight within the Church important?

"This role is nothing new. Archbishop Lefebvre started it, and we are continuing it. It is easy to see in the irritation of the modernists at the steps taken by Benedict XVI."

Where is the Society today? What are its strong points and its weak points? What future do you foresee for it?

"I see a peaceful future. It is a work that has been entrusted to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary; all we have to do is remain faithful to their will. This Church is the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who remains her head and will not allow her to be destroyed."

"The Society's weaknesses? The risk of separation is serious. Look at the caricature of Tradition that calls itself the "Resistance", for example: it is a non-Catholic spirit that is almost sectarian. We wish to have nothing to do with it; it is a movement that is withdrawn into itself, with people who think that they are the only good and just men on earth: that is not Catholic. It is an objective, but relative danger. Most of the Society is healthy and will not fall into these illusions. This encourages us to rely upon supernatural means. God will show us what He wants of us; He will speak through circumstances."

"The strong points? The living fidelity that bears fruit and shows the world today that the Catholic life, even with all its requirements, is possible. But -another weak point- we are men of our times, and it would be a dream to pretend that we are immunized against the influence of the modern world. To be more precise, we must avoid the caricature of wishing for a Church without wrinkles or stains here below: that is not what the good Lord promised us on this earth. That is not what the 'Holy Church' means; it means that she is capable of sanctifying using the means given by Our Lord: the sacraments, the Faith, discipline, religious life, the life of prayer."

What do you think of Cardinal Sarah's suggestion of introducing the traditional offertory into the New Mass?

"It is not a new idea; it has been around in Rome for ten years. I am glad it has been taken up again. Some criticize the idea, saying it is a way of mixing the profane with the sacred. On the contrary, in the perspective of bringing health back to the Church, I think it would be a great step forward, because the Offertory is a summary of the Catholic principles of the Mass, of the expiatory sacrifice offered to the Blessed Trinity, offered by the priest to God in reparation for sins, and accompanied by the faithful. And that would gradually bring the faithful back to the traditional Mass they have lost."

How would you like to conclude, your Excellency?

"In my opinion, we are on the eve of important events that we cannot yet define very well. I would like to call for prayers and end with a gaze towards God, which allows us to always have hope."

Bp. Williamson gives a shoutout to Francis

Bp. Williamson says the following in the above video at 49 minutes 33 seconds:

“Can you imagine?  That commanding resistant priests is like trying to herd cats.  Can you imagine?  Is it unimaginable?  In which case, is it worth trying if it's bound to fail? In it's...  It may be better not to attempt than to attempt and fail.  Some of you may think it would be better to attempt cause it might succeed.  I don't have the authority.  I don't, I..., I...,  

If ..., if ..., if ... by some miracle, Pope Francis rang me up next week and said,

"Your Excellency, you and I have had our divergences, but right now I am authorizing you to found a society.  You go right ahead for the good of the Church."  

"Uh, Holy Father, can I have that  in writing?"   

"Do you mind if I come to Rome and get that with your signature?" 

"Yes, of course."  

"Alright!"  

Then I'd be on the next plane to Rome.  I'd be on the next plane to Rome!  But without that, we're up a creek without a paddle.  And I don't, there's  not a solution.  So, in the resis..., in what is called the resistance movement, you're going to have a problem of authority.  Get used to the idea.”

Bp. Williamson is now a 'cat herder'