N.B .: This letter first appeared on the Canada Fidèle web-site on 24 October, 2018.

It is with regret that we find ourselves compelled to publish the following letter "so that truth and justice be not violated."

Lakeville, 24 October 2018

Father,

With white hair comes wisdom, the saying goes. Lately, however, it seems that you have been trying to disprove the popular adage. From what comes to my ears, your ways are not as wise as your hair is white. 

Indeed, on Sunday 9 September, at the SSPX's Montreal chapel, would you not have lost your cool, when you exposed, in the pulpit, the situation of a young man, baptised by me, who asked you to be admitted to Confirmation?

What could possibly legitimise the freedom with which you allowed yourself to make known publicly the private interviews you had with this young man? What is more, what could possibly legitimise accusations made against absent people and above all to constitute the faithful as judges of the soul of their neighbour?

This attitude, all the more unworthy as you are a priest with white hair, compels me, you will understand, to make some clarifications so that the truth and justice be not violated.

At the cost of great hardship, a young man finds the light

On 13 February, I administered a conditional baptism to C. V., a young man of 20, from Montreal, who was converting to the true faith, after a stint with the Protestants (where he had received a dubious baptism).

This young man is the only member of his family to have converted. He lives with his parents who have not been converted, surrounded by his brothers and sisters who have not been converted. These are the important obstacles he had to overcome to receive grace despite his young age. Like many converts today, it was through the internet that he discovered the existence of Tradition. The Canada Fidèle web-site allowed him to contact me. He asked me how to join Tradition. This is how I was able to offer my support.

After giving him a full catechism course and answering the many questions he had, I gave him a conditional baptism in the Catholic rite, as was the custom in North America before Vatican Council II for anyone who had received baptism in a Protestant sect, after the abjuration, as it should be, of the errors of Protestantism.

Get to know the different groups of Tradition better

Some time later, this young man said to me: "Father, I approached you through your web-site and I thank you for all the help you have given me, but I would like to get to know the other groups in Tradition and hear what they have to say first-hand. I may prefer to join one or the other of them.” To which I replied: "Good! I understand that you want to know the different groups. Go and see for yourself what it is. "

It should be noted that, on my recommendation, this young man already attended the chapel on rue Dante (FSSPX).

His first decisive experience was with the Society of St. Peter. He began to go to mass at Saint-Irénée Church in Montréal. After some time, the priest of the Society of St. Peter mentioned to him that he should probably make an abjuration because he had attended the chapel of the Society of St. Pius X. The priest of the Ecclesia Dei institute was not however categorical. He hesitated a little because of the current rapprochement of the Society of St. Pius X with Rome ...

But when my name was mentioned, then the priest of the Society of St. Peter no longer had any doubts: An abjuration was necessary, as if our young man had belonged to a non-Catholic society… That is to say the alarming confusion which reigns in the mind of this member of an Ecclesia Dei institute… It is indeed difficult to measure the blindness into which people fall who knowingly submit to the conciliar sect… This experience was not useless, however, for our young man and he did not remain at Saint-Irénée!

It was then that he joined the Saint Joseph chapel in rue Dante (FSSPX) from March until September, and this assiduously, attending Mass every Sunday when I was absent, and also regularly on Fridays and Saturdays, going to confession, receiving Communion and behaving like so many other converts that I have known during my two years at Saint Joseph.

Meeting with a sectarian priest

The inevitable happened. Having asked that those who wished to receive the sacrament of Confirmation during the visit of Bishop De Galaretta in September come to see you, you received, Father, the visit of this young man who had been attending the chapel for six months and who wanted to receive the sacrament of Confirmation.

"- How long have you been coming to the chapel?

- Since the month of March.

- Good! Are you baptised?

- Yes of course! 

- Who baptised you?

- Father Roy.

- What, Father Roy!?! (Let us pass over here your backbiting towards me in front of this young man; that is not the subject of this letter.) Father Roy does whatever, you cannot go to his Masses! "

The young man expressed his astonishment to you at such words. “I personally do not want to be in any group. I am a Catholic, that is all. I ask you for Confirmation, nothing more. "

It was then that you would have given him the following answer, which is astounding: "At least we are recognised by Rome, but Father Roy is not."

Father, have you lost your mind? Does the prospect of long-awaited recognition make you dizzy? Have you not spent most of your life ministering without having Roman jurisdiction? Why now brandish your contemptible "Roman gratitude" which made you lose all honour? Do you need to remember that you were one of the signatories of the Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin in 1988, which affirmed: "To be therefore publicly associated with the sanction which strikes the six Catholic bishops, defenders of the faith in its integrity and its wholeness, would be for us a mark of honour and a sign of orthodoxy before the faithful. They indeed have a strict right to know that the priests to whom they are speaking are not of the communion of a counterfeit Church, evolutionary, Pentecostal, and syncretistic"? Your current attitude therefore inspires disgust. You are neither a man of honour nor a man of your word.

You then told him that he could only be confirmed after three years of preparation. Father, you do what you want, it is up to you ... But do not say that this is the custom of the District of Canada. Having exercised the priestly ministry at the FSSPX District House of Canada five years before your arrival, I could give you a list of people who were baptised in less than three months and who received confirmation in the same year of their conversion.

All these acts are just wicked devices by which you show that you have little love for souls and that what matters to you is to rule with pride over the Lord's flock.

Some of the faithful also witnessed the fact that, for certain other confirmands who were new to the chapel in rue Dante, it was only after the sacrament of Confirmation had been given to them that you inquired about their baptism and of their preparation for the sacrament… Let’s move on!

After some additional exchanges which informed you that the Fraternity of Saint Peter had offered him confirmation immediately after his arrival in Saint-Irénée, you asked the young man to “come back and see you on Sunday”. Which he did ... only to hear that after consulting Father Couture, you were not in a position to admit him to confirmation. The young man insisted on knowing your motivation. You demanded his "submission" !?

Submit to the Society?

Could you clarify, Father, when did the Church make "submission to the Society" a condition for receiving the sacraments? Have the sacraments therefore become for you instruments of power which allow you to persecute a young man who has converted at the cost of many difficulties and after a laborious journey? So are you there to shepherd the Lord's sheep or to shepherd yourself?

What did you say to this young man when he said to you: "I do not want to be part of the Society, nor of any of Father Roy's group. I am a Catholic, that is all. I ask you for confirmation, nothing more."

The story does not end there

The story could have ended there. This young man would have eventually made his decision to stay away from the Society and I would not have intervened as I do. But no, you had to make your case worse!

As I said above, on Sunday 9 September, in the pulpit of truth of Saint Joseph chapel in Montreal, you therefore shouted your throat, to make known to all, in his absence, the case of this young man, and your being scandalised that he had received the baptism at the hands of "a wandering priest" and above all "after only three months of preparation.”

·      First, what authority have you received over the faithful of the city of Montreal, so that the Lord cannot act through priests other than you to lead to the waters of regeneration the souls that He desires? Have you therefore become an obligatory passage for the Lord? An indispensable man? If the Lord wants to act through priests other than you to save souls, what problem do you have with that?

·      Second, since when have you become a judge of the adequate preparation of souls who come to other priests for baptism? If a priest takes care of a soul to prepare it for baptism, he is the judge of its preparation and you have nothing to do with it. If this young man approaches you afterwards to receive the sacrament of confirmation, it is up to you to check whether he knows his Faith sufficiently, as you would with any other faithful who would ask you for the same sacrament. Unless you have received jurisdiction over the city of Montreal and have the exclusive right to save souls?

·      Third, you have refrained from verifying the preparation of this young man. He would not be ready because he would only have had three months of preparation for the conditional baptism he received. Well, you do well not to look any further! It could be very interesting indeed to put this young man and one of your young people from the Montreal chapel next to each other, who is perfectly "submissive" to the Fraternity, and to ask them about their catechism. The observation could be unpleasant for you.

·      Fourth, let me remind you that I have given in the past, as a member of the Society of Saint Pius X, baptisms in such short time as for this young man and this, with the approval of the FSSPX District Superior of Canada. But perhaps what is legitimate in the FSSPX is no longer, outside of it, when we are looking for pretexts to speak badly of our neighbour?

·      Fifth, why refuse - on grounds of insubordination - the sacrament of Confirmation to a faithful to whom you have given for six months the sacrament of penance and the Eucharist? Have you never been interested in knowing who this newcomer to your chapel was? Or were you in too much of a hurry to return to Saint-Césaire?

·      Sixth, how much confidence can the faithful have in a priest who reports their private conversations and personal situations from the pulpit of truth in their absence? Professional secrecy, do you know? Let us hope that you know the sacramental secret better ...

Where does sectarianism lead?

The following story was reported recently by Mr. Dominic Vall, one of the Faithful from Australia:

“On 6 September 6, 2018 (this year), Mr. Ben Bayliss, a practicing traditional Catholic, died in hospital 2 hours after Father T. of the Brisbane parish of the FSSPX refused him the Sacrament of Extreme Unction. Father P. from the same parish refused to announce his death in the bulletin to ask for prayers.

“This is not the first time that Father T. has been found guilty of failing in his priestly duties.

“In April 2016, he refused to give Communion to my five-year-old niece, E. Bretz, who had just made her First Communion and to whom Father T. had previously given the sacrament of Communion. She came to the communion rail three times, and on three occasions he refused her communion (a fact that the whole parish witnessed).

“Father T. also refused the Sacrament of Penance to three other parishioners I know: Mr. John Birchley, Dr. Anthony Pointing and Miss Caitlin Smith (10 years old).

"I am writing this because Father T. is willingly endangering souls, in a spirit of revenge, by repeatedly denying them the sacraments.

“I would like people to be informed of the truth and for the future to be better, so please share this with others. "

Yours in Christ,

Mr. Dominic Wall 

Needless to say, this faithful, who died without the sacraments, was critical of the rallying of the Society of Saint Pius X to modernist Rome ...

Feed the flock of God, not as rulers ...

Anyway, Father, this is just one anecdote among many. Many of the faithful have noticed that you have no love for our country and that French Canada inspires you with contempt. Several people have come to me over the past year, put off by your cheeky and domineering ways.

If our country and the souls who live there inspire you so little love that you feel the need to pass your bad mood on a young man who approached God at the cost of so many difficulties, whom you do not know and that you have not even tried to get to know, maybe it would be good to consider returning to France or elsewhere ...

It is said that you had requested your transfer this year. If so, you have not been answered. Whether this is true or not, we sympathise with you for having to put up with the painful people of Québec. Do not hesitate to ask for the same next year. I would not be surprised if more and more devotees support you in this endeavour.

In the meantime, we will remain what we are even if you do not like it.

For my part, I intend to continue to help the faithful who contact me in the future, even if you do not like that as well.

In Christo,

Fr. Pierre Roy