vendredi 20 mars 2015

Dom Thomas of Aquinas' interview in English about Fr Faure's consecration + commentary

Dom Thomas of Aquinas, Holy Week 2014

Avec l'Immaculée appreciates and respects very much Dom Thomas of Aquinas, but it is a while we do not entirely agree with him on several points. We think that a few of his ideas are potentially dangerous for the future of the Resistance. Dom Thomas follows the line of Avrillé and Fr Pivert and it is not the line of the nullam partem with the modernist Rome until it is fully converted. We will see in Fr Faure's interview the same way of thinking. So we publish this interview of Dom Thomas but we put in purple the parts of the text we disapprove and we will explain why, at the end of the interview. One question is bad and is purple.
 
Source of the interview :
 
March 18
Why a Consecration in 2015?
by Dom Thomas Aquinas OSB
 
Why a consecration in 2015?
Because the situation remains essentially the same as in 1988. Modernist Rome, which manifested itself at the Council, remains in place and becomes more and more modernist and liberal. The profound perversion of the mind is only intensifying.
 
But why not wait for the Society of St. Pius X to give us bishops?
Because the authorities of the Society have taken a new direction in relations with Rome.
 
Do you mean to say that the Society has abandoned the true faith or the fight for the faith?
I mean to say that the leaders of the Society have gradually in recent years, and especially since 2011 and 2012, taken a new direction in their relations with Rome.

But the question is whether or not the Society has abandoned the fight for the faith. What do you think? 
The particularity of liberals is inconsistency. The current leaders of the Society have made the fight of the Society inconsistent. The healthy part of the Society is trying to fight this battle as in the past, but the dominant wing, its Superior General at the top with Fr. Pfluger, persecute those who want to continue this fight as before.
 
Do you have any proof of that?
It is all too abundant. The refusal to ordain the Dominican and Capuchin candidates at the appointed time in 2012 is one. The Benedictines of Bellaigue were also threatened.
But much more serious and significant was the scandalous expulsion of Bishop Williamson, preceded by the order to cease the Eleison Comments. In fact Menzingen does not tolerate us opposing its new orientation. Menzingen does not want us to publicly continue the fight for the faith as before, following Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer.
The district priests are closely monitored and their articles cannot be published without quite strict permission.
 
But what harm is there in that? Every institution must monitor what is being said in its name!
Not like that. We must punish those who write against the Catholic faith, but not install a regime like  the one Bishop Fellay already did.
In addition, those with a liberal tendency have broad permission to write, while the book of Father Pivert is removed from sale. Le Sel de la Terre is frowned upon and removed from press stands. The most faithful priests are disavowed or even punished or expelled.
Unfortunately, examples abound. The list is already long enough, while the GREC was able to work peacefully and Father Pfluger gives his scandalous interviews without being disturbed.
 
But there are good articles in Le Chardonnet, for example. Isn’t it wrong to say that the anti-liberals are persecuted in the Society?
Yes, there are still some good articles in Le Chardonnet, and not only in Le Chardonnet. Unfortunately, this is far from preventing the accordist tendency of Menzingen to move forward.
 
Do you mean, basically, that Menzingen is betraying the fight for the faith?
Yes, Menzingen is betraying the fight for the faith. That is why a consecration has become necessary to assure the continuity of the work of Archbishop Lefebvre, especially as Bishop Fellay now refuses to ordain candidates opposed to his policy, as is the case for several religious communities of men to whom he also refuses the Holy Oils (necessary to baptize children and give extreme unction to the dying). "We continue," very simply, as Archbishop Lefebvre used to say. And we believe that good Catholics support us from the bottom of their heart.
If we seem to be too hard towards Menzingen, take the time to go through the long series of events that have marked the history of Tradition in recent years and you will see that the two most combative bishops of Tradition were, one, expelled from the Society, the other, silenced, at least in part. Added to this are the iniquitous trials of Fr. Pinaud and Fr. Salenave, and still so many facts.
 
What do you think about the candidate chosen?
He was chosen by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988. He proposed another name. It is to his credit. Today he accepts this heavy burden. We are deeply grateful to him.
To conclude, let us also and especially give our gratitude to Bishop Williamson who knew how to protect and transmit the legacy received from the hands of Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer, which is none other than the deposit of the faith entrusted by Our Lord to the Apostles.
A final appeal. Read the works of Archbishop Lefebvre. Everything is there. Read also the Eleison Comments to understand the seriousness of the current evil.
Corçâo said: "Only the saints believe in evil." Deep words which are a warning. May Our Lady help us to see the evil where it is, to work with her, she who has always crushed the head of the infernal serpent. "Ipsa conteret." That is the motto of the one who, God-willing, will tomorrow be Bishop Jean-Michel Faure. May Our Lady bless him and protect him "ad multos annos”.

Commentary of Avec l'Immaculée :

Quote :"Do you mean to say that the Society has abandoned the true faith or the fight for the faith?
 
I mean to say that the leaders of the Society have gradually in recent years, and especially since 2011 and 2012, taken a new direction in their relations with Rome.
But the question is whether or not the Society has abandoned the fight for the faith. What do you think? "
Comment :
Avrillé's question is significant of their spirit : the problem for them is less the relations with Rome than the fight of faith. They separate both concepts (while they shouldn't) because, like Fr Pivert (cf. here et here), they think it is possible to make an agreement with Rome if there are certain conditions which they think are sufficient to protect us (to their mind). They are against the nullam partem position with the modernist Rome until it is fully converted.

Avrillé : Do you have any proof of that?
It is all too abundant. The refusal to ordain the Dominican and Capuchin candidates at the appointed time in 2012 is one. The Benedictines of Bellaigue were also threatened.

But much more serious and significant was the scandalous expulsion of Bishop Williamson, preceded by the order to cease the Eleison Comments. In fact Menzingen does not tolerate us opposing its new orientation. Menzingen does not want us to publicly continue the fight for the faith as before, following Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer.
The district priests are closely monitored and their articles cannot be published without quite strict permission.
Comment :
It is characteristic that, in order to show the doctrinal shift of the sspx, Dom Thomas only gives  examples of punishment and no doctrinal arguments. He should prove the bad orientation of Menzingen on the basis of Bp Fellay's bad quotes or the six conditions which were given during the general Chapter of 2012 or the bad April 15th 2012 declaration. 

"In fact Menzingen does not tolerate us opposing its new orientation." 
Dom Thomas' explanations seem to suggest that if Menzingen  had tolerated us, we should have stayed in the sspx... But even if Menzingen had been kind, we should have left, because it is our duty to speak out clearly for the truth and to openly criticize the six conditions, the declaration of April 15th  2012  and all Bp Fellay's bad speeches.

"following Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer."
Dom Thomas always justifies our fight by saying we must follow Abp Lefebvre. He should stop justifying our fight in this way, since Abp Lefebvre was very goodwill but had not perfect tenets about the relations with Rome -- cf. note at the bottom of this article + this article --. He should justify our fight by saying we want to be faithful to the doctrine of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
 
But what harm is there in that? Every institution must monitor what is being said in its name!
Not like that. We must punish those who write against the Catholic faith, but not install a regime like  the one Bishop Fellay already did.
In addition, those with a liberal tendency have broad permission to write, while the book of Father Pivert is removed from sale. Le Sel de la Terre is frowned upon and removed from press stands.
Comment :
- In our opinion, the problem is not Bp Fellay's authority. It is right, in itself, to prevent some priests from writing things if these things are wrong. The real problem is that Bp Fellay persecutes the truth. 
- We read bad things in Fr Pivert's book : Abp Lefebvre, Our relations with Rome. This book is bad because in chapter 6 and in part in chapter 7, it defends the principle of a practical agreement with Rome, in the same spirit as Abp Lefebvre did. Fr Pivert criticizes the principle of "a purely practical agreement" but he thinks it is possible to come a partly practical agreement with the modernist Rome, if Rome  allegedly gives good garantees, which are for Fr Pivert : that Rome lets us the possibility to keep our antimodernist oath and lets us "preach the reign of Christ the King". He also says that Rome must tell us that it keeps all the previous doctrine of the Church and that the Pope must show his goodwill towards us. Nothing more accurate is given. 
Of course, these conditions are wrong and full of naiveté. The truth is that we should not come to an agreement with Rome until it is perfectly converted because it is a sin to ask souls to put themselves under the authority of heretical Popes like Benedict XVI or Francis. Saint Paul, Saint John and many saints taught us of separating from heretics (cf. many quotes in the nullam partem rubric). And even if we cannot prove with certainty that the conciliar Popes are formal heretics (i.e aware of their mistakes) the reality is that these modernist Popes objectively says heresies (cf. on the right of our blog the "Pape François'"rubric) So we cannot morally accept the principle of coming to a "not purely practical agreement" with Rome, which implicates that the agreement could be, in part, practical. It would implicate that we agree to accept a heretical Pope... And we cannot do that if we want to obey Saint Paul, Saint John and the teachings of many saints.
Le sel de la Terre is Avrillé's magazine. There are very good things in it, but there are also wrong things or ambiguous things. For example, Fr Pierre-Marie of Avrillé does not want to completely cut the relations with the sspx and he wrote it several times. In August 2014, he published a very bad declaration of catholic fidelity (the same as France fidèle, first version) which openly criticized the initial position of the Resistance, that is the nullam partem with Rome until it is not fully converted. After the publishing of our article showing it was a dangerous text, he made no official retractation and just took back the most explicitly worst part of the text but let the main part of the text with dangerous errors, particularly the acceptance of some parts of Vatican II, without precising which parts... when it is a duty to reject this masonic concile as a whole if we want to follow the rules given by Saint Thomas of Aquinas about heresy. cf. detailed explanations here)

Dom Thomas : 'That is why a consecration has become necessary to assure the continuity of the work of Archbishop Lefebvre' 
Comment :
It is not Abp Lefebvre's work we want to preserve. it is the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ. There is too much of lefebvrism in this reflexion and in this interview. 
 
Dom Thomas "If we seem to be too hard towards Menzingen, take the time to go through the long series of events that have marked the history of Tradition in recent years and you will see that the two most combative bishops of Tradition were, one, expelled from the Society, the other, silenced, at least in part. Added to this are the iniquitous trials of Fr. Pinaud and Fr. Salenave, and still so many facts."
Comment :
Again, Dom Thomas gives pragmatic arguments when he should give doctrinal arguments. The whole interview is too "devotional" to Bp Williamson. Bishop Williamson is a man who has defaults and qualities. We must be careful not to fall into a cult of personality.
 
Dom Thomas "A final appeal. Read the works of Archbishop Lefebvre. Everything is there. Read also the Eleison Comments to understand the seriousness of the current evil."
Comment :
Everything is not in the works of Abp Lefebvre. We must at first study the doctrine of the Church. The Eleison Comments are not all good to understand the crisis. We were already obliged in conscience to criticize several of them which were really dangerous or ambiguous or said false things.


Conclusion :

We are sincerely sorry for Dom Thomas, but because of the ideological orientation chosen by Fr Faure in his interview which we comment here, and because we have already had discussions with Dom Thomas about this problem, we prefer to warn now about the danger. If the Resistance keeps going this way, we will soon again have a new split between accordists and antiaccordists... except if God intervenes before, making everybody come to an agreement by sending the world's punishment that we deserve, judging that the damage is important enough like that and that it is time to put an end to this crisis.