|Open Letter of Fr Charles Moulin
|Page 1 of 1|
|Author:||Admin [ Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:50 am ]|
|Post subject:||Open Letter of Fr Charles Moulin|
Translation from Cathinfo.
To his Excellency Monsignor Richard WILLIAMSON
St George’s House
125 Arthur Road
[From] Father Charles Moulin
Priory of St Joseph
17 Place St Claire
Nice, 29 June 2012
Please forgive the public nature of these lines that I permit myself respectfully and amicably to send to you, as a result of the last internal mail from the General Secretary of the Fraternity informing us of your exclusion from the next General Chapter at Ecône.
Also, it is to a personal friend of Archbishop Lefebvre, to the Dean of the bishops of the Society, to the old Superior, Deputy Director of the seminary of Ecône, to my former professor of philosophy and theology, to an elder in the priesthood and lastly to a friend of my family for more than forty years providentially brought together under the protection of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, that I respectfully ask you to consider this letter, the consequence of a probable and unfortunate misunderstanding about you, and [ask you] not to give up going to Ecône as planned for the General Chapter this July! In these difficult times through which the Fraternity is passing, it is true that - according to the charitable words of the good king Louis XVI in his admirable testament - "often in times of trouble and turmoil, a man is not master of himself."
Take no account of Canon No. 1331 § 2, clumsily invoked against yourself, which may equally condemn the "rebellion and disobedience" of Archbishop Lefebvre and undermine the legitimacy of his disobedience towards modernist Rome which has directed the Church since the last Council !
A real misunderstanding, if I engage my personal knowledge of our Superior General - with whom I entered the seminary at Ecône now well over 35 years ago - which allows me to say that he who, for some months, put on a really good show of benevolence, understanding and charity towards former enemies of the Church and the Fraternity, and who accepted in a spirit of openness to dialogue with them, since they seemed to suspend their persecution against us ... cannot, today, forgive his "brother-in-arms" some differences about obedience, after so many years of common struggle and faithful heroism in the service of Christ the King, of his Church, of the Faith, of the Holy Mass and of the Priesthood in the right line of battle of Mgr Lefebvre.
He wants more to punish the fact that a true "Bishop speaks" and responds modestly every week to the legitimate questions of "Catholics confused" by this evolution long judged positively by the Conciliar Church. At a very delicate moment, where he asked them to make a careful and objective study of the texts of Vatican II, and "to read between the lines” of the texts, communications and decisions of the Roman authorities, to discern in them those happy changes which lean, not secretly but discreetly, to favorably revise, in the name of the whole of Tradition, his judgment on the loyal dispositions of the Roman authorities at our meetings and their sincerity about making some reform of their "Church". For example, to be attentive to the facts, such as that which occurred recently in Corsica, where the bishop of the place has generously offered to come to confirm the faithful of our chapel according to the traditional rite ...
Moreover, as it is found, my lord, that providentially you are not engaged in the doctrinal discussions with the Roman authorities, it seems to me that our Superior - concerned about our future independence of speech, and about the "intra-mural" apostolic action of the Fraternity - can only rejoice at your freedom of speech, an authentic and traditional privilege of every Catholic bishop, as both pastor, guardian and defender of the little flock against all enemies of the Church, [who work] both from outside and from within. Does not the Church shows us St Paul preaching sound doctrine "in season and out of season" to severely and even forcefully reprehend the great St. Peter himself? "When Cephas came to Antioch, I withstood him to the face that he was being wrong ... I said to Peter in front of everyone ... " (Gal.2:11-14)
It is equally difficult for me to imagine that our Superior General - who, of the students at the seminary in Ecône, was the one most attentive to your lectures, and who owes to you, as well as Bishop Tissier de Mallerais, the bulk of his solid philosophical and theological formation - can, in this particularly critical period for the future of our Fraternity, dispense with your expertise and with your insights during the next General Chapter which, without doubt, will mark its history.
It is especially difficult for me to imagine that our Superior, always anxious to unite our Fraternity, can legitimately exclude one of the four bishops, chosen by Archbishop Lefebvre himself, without breaking the close and indissoluble union desired by him, and [without] destroying their harmonious complementarity.
Your servant being personally convinced that you have been providentially chosen by our Founder, for your personal charisma and meritorious conversion from Anglicanism, in order to effectively prevent, an ever-possible "protestantization" of our modest Fraternity, after having, over fifty years, helplessly watched that process in the whole Church.
It is also difficult for me to understand that he wants to deprive himself of your valuable knowledge in the field of subversive tactics, modernists, liberals and revolutionary enemies of the Church. Formation largely enriched over time by your friendly and close contacts with some men who have been providentially raised up for our time (although, alas, a certain number of them have become fairly unpopular in our traditional circle following the work a certain "Gentleman Burglar"!) I think most particularly of those gentlemen Pierre Virion and A.-M. Bonnet Viller ... and many others including John Vaquier ... authors who are all essential to know in order to form a good understanding of the terrible religious, social and political crisis that we are going through, and whose writings our Superior cannot ignore according the recommendation of Our Lord in inviting his apostles "to be as harmless as doves and wise as like serpents."
It is finally difficult for me to imagine this General Chapter without your eminent presence, which might perhaps be reasonably expected for the sake of solidarity, to deprive it also of the presence of your two other brethren in the Episcopate, but above all to deprive our Superior General of your valuable advice in the final drafting of the underlying reasons that he will necessarily put to the Roman authorities to justify the refusal of the Fraternity to accept the terms of the last proposal of Cardinal Levada, judged by him as unacceptable.
God grant that this misunderstanding is happily and quickly overcome, that the entire General Chapter may find its legitimacy, and allow, in peace and unity, to all the delegates in agreement, have the time both to fruitfully meditate upon the truth beautifully formulated by St John Chrysostom in saying that "the blessings of a friend are to be more trusted than to the eager kisses of an enemy" and finally to work on asking the Roman authorities, with the lifting of excommunication of two great "Forgotten Ones", the full and complete rehabilitation of our revered and lamented founder Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to whom we owe so much!
Hoping with all my heart that you take into account my supplication, please believe, my lord, in the expression of my respectful and priestly friendship, in Christo Rege and Maria.
|Author:||Admin [ Mon Jul 02, 2012 5:06 am ]|
|Post subject:||Re: Open Letter of Fr Charles Moulin|
I take this as an indication that some kind of coup is planned at the General Chapter. How significant this plan is, how advanced and what degree of success it can hope for, cannot be determined. Maybe it will fizzle. Whether or not Bishop Williamson shows up at the General Chapter will be a key factor. if he does, it's open war.
Indications from within the SSPX are that there are a lot of angry men right now. The opposition to Bishop Fellay has obviously been driven by a degree of anger. This has been manifest. The latest indications are that a reaction has set in, and now a number of priests who were on the fence are angry at the tactics employed by the opposition. This has the potential to blow up even more dramatically than we have already seen.
It's clear that agendas are being prosecuted on the Web. There is an agenda from a clique within the Fraternity to depose Bishop Fellay. There is a separate agenda on the part of some hard-line sedes to foment disunity and anger. The partisans of the first agenda are happy to see the second agenda flourish. The compliment is returned by those pushing the second agenda. But they are quite distinct programmes being prosecuted by distinct individuals, with quite different motives. That is also completely clear to those with sufficient facts.
Cathinfo is home to both agendas, acting in mutually reinforcing ways. Likewise Ignis Ardens.
What an almighty mess. What an unprecedented success for the devil, and for all who hate the Fraternity, especially "rome". Do the key members of the General Chapter have enough humility and wisdom to get above all of this and make a settlement? Let's hope and pray they do.
|Page 1 of 1||All times are UTC|
|Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group