Um Poema para Francisco: por Pe. Gaspar, um sacerdote de Campos

Nota do blog:  Por acidente encontrei este poema, pois poema ou ladainha não sei, dedicado ao primeiro ano do pontificado do Francisco.  Me deu um choque com saber que foi escrito por um sacerdote da Administração Apostólica São João Maria Vianney, conhecido como os padres de Campos, e foi publicado no site oficial deles.  Eu mesmo fico não acreditando como é que um sacerdote formado na Tradição pode ser tão enganado assim.  Realmente é inacreditável.  Depois de ter lido esta ladainha publicada no site dos padres de Campos e com saber que nem o nome do grande Dom Antônio aparece no seu site, pois não merecem e nem querem ser chamados filhos espirituais do Leão de Campos e deve ser uma memoria que somente querem esquecer.  Voltando da sagração de Dom Faure e ordenação de Pe. André Zelaya de Leon umas semanas atrás, por casualidade, conheci este sacerdote de Campos que escreveu o poema.  Conheci ele na Rua Dom Antônia de Castro Mayer em São Fidélis onde realizou uma sagração episcopal sem aprovação da Roma moderna em 1991.  

Meus comentários aparecem em vermelhos, adicionei fotos ao texto e links de informações. O sublinhado foi acrescentado. Líberanos Deus de uma acordo com Roma!- Nossa Senhora de Aparecida  

Por: Pe. Gaspar S. C. Pelegrini

Ordenação de Pe. Gaspar por Sua Excelência Bispo Rangel, Dom Tomas Aquino ao lado do bispo.  Na época Dom Rangel foi "excomungado" da igreja conciliar. 

  Hoje eu quero unir a minha voz à de tantas pessoas para agradecermos a Deus o primeiro ano de Pontificado do Papa Francisco. 

( "Transforme este homem em santo já, ok?", completou Elton John, que no ano passado já havia elogiado Francisco. http://g1.globo.com/musica/noticia/2014/10/elton-john-chama-papa-francisco-de-meu-heroi-transformem-em-santo.html )

( O cantor pop britânico Elton John disse que o papa Francisco é "maravilhoso", e que Jesus defenderia a ideia do matrimônio homossexual, em uma entrevista na rede Sky News neste domingo (29).    http://g1.globo.com/musica/noticia/2014/06/elton-john-diz-que-papa-francisco-e-maravilhoso.html )

Mas quem é Francisco?

( "...quem sou eu...para julgar?" http://veja.abril.com.br/noticia/mundo/se-um-gay-busca-deus-quem-sou-eu-para-julgar-diz-papa )

( "chamar-me Jorge"- Francisco http://traditioninaction.org/religious/d025_Jorge.htm)

Francisco é um dom para a Igreja hoje.

(Papa Francisco chama internet de 'dom de Deus'

http://g1.globo.com/mundo/noticia/2014/01/papa-francisco-chama-internet-de-dom-de-deus.html )

( "Vaticano corrige Papa Francisco"- o dom para a Igreja corrigido pelo Vaticano-

http://www.pragmatismopolitico.com.br/2013/05/papa-francisco-e-os-ateus.html )

Francisco é o “resultado” da oração de milhões de católicos que há um ano pediam a Deus um novo Pontífice segundo o Coração de Cristo.

( E os outros papas não foram?  Até agora nos chegou o dom que pedimos de Deus?)

Francisco foi o consolo de Deus, depois do choque que todos nós levamos com o anúncio de que nosso sempre amado Bento XVI iria renunciar.

 ( Os católicos conservadores estão detestando o novo papa. )

 http://www.diariodocentrodomundo.com.br/os-catolicos-conservadores-estao-detestando-o-novo-papa/ )

( Eles temem que populismo dele pode fornecer cobertura para uma afiação longe de posições doutrinárias há muito estabelecidos, especialmente sobre as questões no centro dos sínodos sobre a família.  http://www.getreligion.org/getreligion/2015/3/15/how-bad-can-pope-francis-vs-pope-benedict-xvi-frame-game-get-check-this-out )

Francisco é a prova de que Bento XVI agiu impulsionado por Deus quando decidiu renunciar. Bento hoje vive tranquilo, pois vê que a Igreja continua em boas mãos.

( Declarações e abertura a novas abordagens improvisadas de Francisco deixam claro que ele é um papa muito diferente-e, salvo se Bento tem perdido sua mente, ele não poderia ser completamente feliz com isso. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/05/the-pope-in-the-attic/359816/ )

( Papas Bento e Francisco em desacordo sobre 'A indissolubilidade' de Casamento-  http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/pope-benedict-marriage-francis/2014/12/09/id/611872/ )

Francisco é o Papa que fala mais com gestos que com palavras.

 

Francisco é uma pregação constante, que nos lembra que muitas vezes nos perdemos em coisas supérfluas.

Francisco é sinônimo de sair de si mesmo, de ir ao encontro do outro, de ir às periferias existenciais.

( Papa Francisco diz que ele iria batizar extraterrestres Leia mais em: http://arquivoufo.com.br/2014/05/14/papa-francisco-diz-que-ele-iria-batizar-extraterrestres/ )

Francisco é sinônimo de alegria do Evangelho, vivido com radicalidade, pregado com clareza e profundidade.

Francisco é Pastor supremo de uma Igreja de portas abertas, com confessionários funcionando, de uma Igreja que é mãe e não uma alfândega de Sacramentos.

( Francisco lava os pês de um transvestiste e depois ela comunga...  http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com.br/2015/04/not-only-was-isabel-lisboas-foot-washed.html )

(em português http://escravasdemaria.blogspot.com.br/2015/04/papa-francisco-veio-servi-o-que.html )

Francisco é um antídoto contra o pessimismo, o derrotismo, as quaresmas sem páscoa, as caras de vinagre…

Francisco é um chicote contra as fofocas, os maus juízos, o carreirismo, o exibicionismo.

Francisco quer padres pastores, não funcionários.

Francisco quer padres misericordiosos, não rigoristas nem laxistas.

Francisco é um eco de misericórdia, de compaixão, de bondade.

http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/holding-hands-with-francis.htm

Francisco é um brado contra o mundanismo, fora e dentro da Igreja.

Francisco é um açoite contra a idolatria do dinheiro e do poder.

Francisco se incomoda e se sente ofendido quando o apresentam ideologizado, deturpado.

Francisco é o rosto que Cristo quer hoje para a Sua Igreja.

Francisco, enfim, é a imagem de Cristo, Bom Pastor, que nos ama, nos conhece, e dá, aos poucos, sua vida por nós.

Sala Paulo VI no Vaticano, Imagem de Cristo Ressuscitado

Por isso, hoje nós dizemos: Senhor, obrigado por tudo que nos destes, quando nos destes Francisco.

Puxa saco!

Fonte: aqui se encontra no Site Oficial da Administração Apostolica São João Maria Vianney

Leia também: Carta Aberta ao Dom Rifan

Fr. Thomas Aquinas OSB:The Perversion of the Mind

The Perversion of the Mind: by Fr. Thomas Aquinas OSB

translated by Michael Fuller

SOURCE

Since the 90s, the Superior General of the Society and his closest advisers have undertaken a frightening task: to lead Tradition into the arms of modernist Rome.  This is what they are doing whether or not they were aware of the severity of their crime. Bishop Fellay is destroying the work of Archbishop Lefebvre. The childishness of Dom Gérard, as Archbishop Lefebvre labeled it, returns this time in the pen and thoughts of Bishop Fellay and his assistants: To read your letter -he writes to his brothers in the episcopate (letter of April 14, 2012)- one seriously wonders if you still believe that the visible Church whose seat is in Rome is indeed the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ (...) ".

Bishop Fellay distorts things.  Bishop Fellay sows confusion while forgetting about the distinctions made by Archbishop Lefebvre together with many other prominent theologians and Catholic thinkers. "The Society of St. Pius X has never left the Church.  She is in the heart of the Church", Bishop Tissier rightly noted. (Rivarol, June 13, 2012).  But Bishop Fellay is captivated by an idea that has taken root deep in his mind.  The canonical regularization must be obtained at all costs.  This is already forgotten some will claim.  Bishop Fellay has just opposed the statements of Archbishop Pozzo on this issue.  Well, Bishop Fellay deceives his own supporters.  He has been hiding the truth for years.  Nothing has been withdrawn from his statements. "This concrete situation, with the canonical solution that has been proposed, is quite different from that of 1988 ", he wrote in response to the letter of Bishop Williamson, Bishop Tissier and Bishop De Galarreta.

But the supporters of Bishop Fellay will repeat that all of this is in the past. But then why did Fr. Alain Nely say to a superior of a monastery: "the solution for the Society will be a unilateral recognition"?  And furthermore: "It is without signing anything, there will not be a document nor will a signature be required.” This happened about a year ago.

By taking steps forward and steps back, Menzingen has all the people who trust in their good will on tenterhooks.  Whatever may be the case with their dubious and very strange good will, which I do not trust at all, the fact is that the behavior of Bishop Fellay, as a whole, indicates quite clearly the final cause that drives it. This cause is an agreement with a Rome that is supposedly on its way to converting.  This final cause is the pragmatism of the gradual negotiations of Bishop Fellay, as Rome will not all at once convert.  How will Rome be converted?   Only God knows. What we all do know is that modernist Rome can line up a long series of tombs where its victims rest in the shadow of death: Father Augustin, Dom Gérard, P. de Blignères, the Fraternity of St. Peter, Campos, the Redemptorists, Oasis, Friars of the Immaculate, etc.  In this beautiful cemetery, there is still room for the SSPX.  If it were up to Bishop Fellay, this would be a done deal.  For some in the Society, the “Ecclesia Dei” communities are not in such a bad situation. The Society would have good company in this beautiful setting.

What is surprising is to see the behavior of the faithful.  How can the lack of reaction on their part be explained?  And even more so, from the priests.  Surely they are waiting for worse before they will act.  A signature.  But Father Nely already said: "there will not be a document nor will a signature be required”.

The strength of Menzingen is in hiding the truth.  But above all, their strength is in the weakness of the good-intentioned.  Menzingen has weighed the force of Tradition in its scales, and was able to realize their weakness or their naivety. Tradition has invincible principles, but as to the strength of attachment to these principles, that is another matter. To this we must add the complicity of life itself.  It is easier for those who have no wife and children to make a difficult decision, but it is not the same for those who have ten children to enroll in a good school.  For the priests it is another matter. Each one of them may calculate their responsibilities.

Menzingen has mastered the art of governing in the manner of Machiavelli: privacy of emails revealed, the merciless trials of Frs. Pinaud and Salenave. Ruthless sanctions to good priests who dare to defend the thinking and guiding principles of Archbishop Lefebvre.

But these facts seem lost to memories.  Some say that Bishop Fellay has changed.  He does not want the agreement.  Things are being resolved.  There is nothing to be worried about.  Pure subjectivism!  Pure sentimentalism!

“The more one analyzes the documents of the Vatican II and their interpretation by the authorities of the Church, and the more one realizes that they are neither superficial errors nor a few particular errors such as ecumenism, religious freedom, collegial structure, but rather a total perversion of the spirit, a whole new philosophy founded upon Subjectivism… It is very serious! A total perversion! … That is really alarming.”

 (Mons. Lefebvre, quoted in the letter of April 7th, 2012, from the three bishops to Bishop Fellay and his assistants).

Is Tradition itself beginning to fall into this abyss? Unfortunately, it seems so. A weak king weakens a strong people said Luiz de Camões, a Portuguese poet.  Bishop Fellay is this king. Hopefully, he will not reach his goals and the love of truth will re-flourish within Tradition.  That the small remnant, “pusillus grex”, be hardened by this new combat, this crisis in the crisis, this crisis within Tradition, and that the hypocrisy of Menzingen be known and rejected with the same vigor that was of advantage to the disciples of He who died because He came into this world to bear witness to the Truth (Cf. John XVIII, 37).

The Hidden Truth, or the Refusal to See It

The Hidden Truth, or the Refusal to See It

By Fr. Thomas Aquinas OSB
translated by Michael Fuller

source

It is astonishing to see the truth, although public, being ignored.  But what truth are we talking about? Of the most evident facts of the current crisis in Tradition in general and in particular in the Society, and within the reach of all who want to know. Truth unknown, hidden or simply not sought; ignored in all cases, if not to say despised.

Some claim, like Fr. Lourenço Fleichman OSB, that the resistance presents an “argument lacking fundamentals, based on false information" (see  Sobre a Sagração Episcopal).

If there is a need to reiterate what has already been said and to preach in season and out of season, we do not become weary in doing so, since St. Paul exhorts us to.  If there is a need to reproduce the arguments and remind others of the facts, we do not get tired of repeating them and reminding others of them.  Once more we make the diagnosis of the disease that erodes Tradition and threatens everyone with death. This evil is the Catholic Liberalism, plague of modern times, contradiction embodied in the people that embrace it. All of us who most often consider ourselves immune to this universal contagion are susceptible to be victims of this evil.

And so it is necessary to defend the work, thoughts, and intransigent Catholic line of Archbishop Lefebvre that is none other than that of St. Pius X and the entire Magisterium of the Church from its founding up unto the apostasy triggered by the Second Vatican Council.

But before this let us deal with the details; those details without which we are unable to achieve any real diagnosis of the disaster of which we are witnesses. Let us therefore begin with the movement known as GREC (Group for Reflection Among Catholics), and we shall arrive up until  this very day in a very brief review of some important facts that will point to the final cause that motivates and explains them.

In 1995, shortly before his death, the former French ambassador to the Vatican, Gilbert Pérol, wrote an article of "good offices" with the intent to promote a friendly rapprochement between the Society and the official Church.  In this project his wife, Mrs. Huguette Pérol, continued and then a first working structure was established in 1998.

Shortly after, this group took the name cited above, GREC, and reunited members of the SSPX and the progressive clergy.  Over the years this group attracted the attention of the French episcopate, no less than that of Rome.  The objective of GREC, as one of its founders, Father Michel Lelong,  explains “is the necessary reconciliation between Tradition and Rome". [i] An objective mistake, because as Archbishop Lefebvre stated: "Rome has lost the faith ... Rome is in apostasy "(cf. Conference to priests in Ecône during the retreat for priests on September 1, 1987).  

But for GREC, these words of Archbishop Lefebvre do not deserve attention. They are words spoken in a "time of distress" as one of defenders of the line of Bishop Fellay stated.  The members of GREC believe they see events from a higher point, with more serenity, thus targeting an “impossible reconciliation", as Fr. Rioult says very well, reconciliation between two opposing realities: between the true Church, eternal Rome, and the official church, modernist Rome.  The truth is that here we see the crux of the problem in the Society because Menzingen has continued since then to seek this reconciliation advocated by GREC, using its authority to stop criticism of the Holy See i.e., the modernists that occupy it. [ii] This is the reason of Bishop Fellay having asked Bishop Williamson to cease his "Eleison Comments" and not to have made strong criticisms of the last ecumenical meeting of Assisi.

Let us remember, albeit briefly, other facts:

•

Response of April 14th, 2012, by Bishop Fellay, to the other three bishops of the Society, in which he tells his brother bishops that they "lack realism and supernatural spirit";

•

Doctrinal statement of April 15^th, 2012. This statement raised a reaction such that Bishop Fellay found himself compelled to withdraw it.  But he did not retract it even to this day. The Society was and is not yet "ripe" to accept it.  

•

May 11th, 2012, Bishop Fellay gives an interview to the American television channel CNS (Catholic News Service), in which he minimizes the seriousness of the conciliar document "Dignitatis Humanae".

•

In July 2012 the General Chapter of the Society meets without the presence of Bishop Williamson, who was forbidden to be there. The result of this chapter is the abandonment of the decision of the last General Chapter (2006), which established that it would not undergo any practical agreement with Rome without a prior "doctrinal agreement”, in other words, before the conversion of Rome.

•

Shortly after the expulsion of Bishop Williamson from the Society is announced, an expulsion that he considers null; and Bishop Williamson invites Bishop Fellay to resign from his position in order to not to destroy the work of Archbishop Lefebvre.

•

On June 13, 2012 Bishop Tissier de Mallerais manifests himself against the politic of an agreement in an interview with the newspaper "Rivarol", without, however, mentioning Bishop Fellay. Note that Bishop Tissier was transferred from Ecône to a priory in the United States. That is how the seminarians had lost contact with the oldest collaborator of the Archbishop.

In the following months, several statements, public and private, expressed and reinforced the pragmatic policy of the Society in relation to Rome. "Unilateral recognition" is the suitable formula to obtain the acceptance by members of the Society. But this is the same solution accepted by Dom Gerard (Barroux - France) in 1988, as well as Campos in 2002.   A canonical recognition has been sufficient, whether unilateral or not, to create dependence on the modernist authorities and this time allow them to annihilate the whole tradition.  It is not the inferiors that make the superiors, but the superiors that make the inferiors, as Archbishop Lefebvre noted.   It's a simple matter of common sense, but common sense is no longer very common.

It is convenient to recall to mind the iniquitous trials of which Frs. Pinaud and Salenave suffered, trials described and commented on by Fr. François Pivert in the book "Quel droit pour la Tradition catholique?".

Religious communities that did not approve of the Menzingen policy had already been the subject of several measures of pressure and vexation. The list is long.  Recall the postponement of ordinations of the Dominican and Capuchin deacons in 2012. The Benedictines of Bellaigue were also threatened to have the ordinations of their candidates postponed. Now, this is explained if we consider that the superiors of these three religious houses had been in Menzingen to express their disagreement with Bishop Fellay.

However, those who support Bishop Fellay said that that is water under the bridge: the 2012 General Chapter gave a satisfactory solution to the question; which is false. Both Fr. Pflüger, first assistant of Bishop Fellay, and Fr. Alain Nely, second assistant, spoke on the subject, whether in private conversations, or in retreats, and also in public interviews.

You cannot in any way say that all that was problematic in the Society is remedied. If this were true, Bishop Williamson would have been rehabilitated, honored and listened to because that was his initiative in drafting the letter to the General Council, also signed by Bishop Tissier and Bishop de Galarreta, which saved the Society from an agreement with Rome in 2012. Three bishops against the agreement were too much for Rome. It was better to wait for more propitious times.

For Archbishop Lefebvre this opportune moment to express himself- was the conversion of Rome and acceptance of the doctrines of the papal documents Quanta Cura, Syllabus, Pascendi, Quas Primas, etc. But for Bishop Fellay, the propitious times arrived and brought with them the spirit of decreased combat on the part of the Society, i.e. the alignment ("ralliement" in French) that culminated in his statement of April 15, 2012 and continues even without the signature of an agreement.

The conclusion of all this is something amazing and tragic. These facts are public, mostly. Why is there not a greater reaction to Bishop Fellay’s policy? Apparently, it is because liberalism and apostasy already operate within Tradition itself.  Bishop Fellay, assisted by many priests, created a state of disorientation such that many faithful are no longer able to discern anything about what is happening with the work of Archbishop Lefebvre.

That's why we say that the truth about these events remain hidden even though it is public.  It would be a good time to quote the famous phrase of Chesterton, the following: "The modern world is run by a hidden force that is called publicity". What matters, as a friend of ours has said, are not the facts, but the version of the facts. Now the triumphant version is that Bishop Williamson and Bishop Faure are disobedient and that the superiors of the Society are the true followers of Archbishop Lefebvre. This is false, as we demonstrate. This is the heart of the problem..

"Now is your hour and the power of darkness" (Luke. XXII, 53).  Maybe the Resistance has to survive as the apostles and disciples did while scattered about during the time of the Passion. It is useful to recall a reflection from the great Brazilian thinker, Gustavo Corção: “ I do not believe in any work nowadays bringing together a large number of people". Perhaps the resistance is the  opusillus grex to what Our Lord urged not to fear because it pleased the Father to give you the kingdom. That the protection of the Blessed Virgin may keep us faithful to the end! "Ut Fidelis inveniatur".

Fr. Thomas Aquinas OSB

April 1st, 2015

_________
[i] Pour la nécéssaire réconciliation, Nouvelles Éditions Latines, 2011, p. 15.
[ii] Ibidem, p. 50.