Let's Adore Jesus-Eucharist! | Home >> Directory of sheep and wolves

Correspondence with Father Pierre-Henri Gouy, FSSP

Father Pierre-Henri Gouy, FSSP

Note: This correspondence is my English translation of the French original.

1) S. Jetchick (2011-November-15)
2) P.-H. Gouy (2011-November-16)
3) S. Jetchick (2011-November-16)
4) S. Jetchick (2011-November-21)
5) Post-Scriptum

1) S. Jetchick (2011-November-15)

-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Jetchick
Sent: 15 November 2011 11:31
To: Gouy, abbé Pierre-Henri
Subject: Questions about your recent sermons

Good day Father Gouy,

For the third sermon in a row, this Sunday November 13th,
I thought I heard you take a dig at the official teachings
of the Church. I'd like to give you the exact quote, but
I don't know where to obtain the transcriptions of your
sermons.

This Sunday, it was the Catechism of the Catholic Church
which, supposedly, contained serious errors, whereas the
Blessed John Paul II said it was "a sure norm for
teaching the faith" [Fidei Depositum, 1992-Oct-11].

I'm also pretty sure I read in one of your e-mails that
going to a so-called "Vatican II" Mass was an objective
evil. I had invited you to a public debate on the Internet
about that topic, but you apparently didn't have the courage,
or judged appropriate, to show up for that debate...

As far as I know, the Archbishop of Quebec allowed the
FSSP into the diocese because the FSSP rejects neither the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, nor the Vatican II
Mass.

I never heard your predecessor, Father Guillaume Loddé,
attack either the Catechism of the Catholic Church, or the
reformed liturgical calendar, or the Vatican II Mass.
Yes, he often attacked the silly things done in the name
of the infamous "spirit" of Vatican II, but I never
heard him attack the ordinary Magisterium of the Church.

Am I the victim of auditory hallucinations? If so, I'm not
alone! I consulted three other persons, who claimed to have
heard the same thing as me.

Should I keep quiet? Not according to a famous doctor of
the Church:

	"It must be observed, however, that if the faith were
	endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even
	publicly."
	[Somma Theologica, IIa-IIae, q. 33, a. 4, ad. 2]

According to me, in your next sermon, you should say
something along these lines:

	"Last week, during my sermon, perhaps I was not well
	understood when I spoke about the Catechism of the
	Catholic Church. This catechism, enacted by the
	Blessed John Paul II in 1992, is of course
	"a sure norm for teaching the faith", and its teachings
	are part of what theologians call the Ordinary
	Magisterium.

	What we can be against, is of course not the teachings
	of the Ordinary Magisterium, but against the false
	interpretations of those teachings.

	These false interpretations are often made in the name
	of a foggy and satanic "spirit of Vatican II".
	To add insult to injury, this so-called "spirit of
	Vatican II" is contradicted by the official
	documents of that selfsame Council of Vatican II!

	This must not surprise us, since Satan is a liar and
	the father of lies, and that nothing pleases Satan
	so much as underhanded tricks that make Christians
	reject the Magisterium of the Church."

In Christ,

Stefan

2) P.-H. Gouy (2011-November-16)

-----Original Message-----
From: PH G [irneherreip (add at sign) gmail.com]
Sent: 16 November 2011 09:07
To: Stefan Jetchick
Subject: Re: Questions about your recent sermons

Dear Sir,

I'm happy to see that you listen to my sermons and
that you come three Sundays in a row.
All in all, a model faithful.
I thank you for your messages and your support.
I indeed was not clear.
I'll talk to you about this again.
Be thanked and assured of my sacerdotal dedication.
In Xti Corde,
PhGouy

3) S. Jetchick (2011-November-16)

-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Jetchick
Sent: 16 November 2011 10:03
To: PH G
Subject: RE: Questions about your recent sermons

Good day Father,

>> All in all, a model faithful.

:-)

Seriously, unfortunately not, but at least I'm trying!

>> I indeed was not clear.
>> I'll talk to you about this again.

It's especially the whole congregation that needs
to hear about this again!

But I want to repeat once again: we are very happy to
have you in Quebec City. You are way above the average
clergy in our sad diocese!

More over, I have much pity for you: you are pulled
from all sides. (Such is life in a basket of crabs,
ahem, I mean in a trad parish!)

:-D

SJJ

4) S. Jetchick (2011-November-21)

-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Jetchick
Sent: 21 November 2011 13:33
To: Gouy, abbé Pierre-Henri
Subject: Continuation of our correspondence

Good day Father,

Given your preceding e-mail which seemed promising, and
the fact that you were all smiles when we met yesterday,
during the dead leaf raking bee at St-Zéphirin, I was
expecting a positive outcome for this story.

That is also why I had not made public our correspondence.

When you started your Sunday sermon yesterday, by
announcing that you were going to make a clarification
on your comments about the Catechism of the Catholic
Church, I rejoiced.

I was not expecting that you would renew your attacks,
while making them worse. But that is what you did. It
was even more disturbing given that, once more, you
avoided debating a grown man, trained in theology and
philosophy, to rather spew your accusations in front
of defenseless women and children.

Once again, I would like to precisely quote what you
said, but the obviously written text that you read
yesterday was not available on your web site. I even
recieved an e-mail from a parishioner this morning,
saying that despite the requests from some [parishioners]
to have the transcriptions of your sermons, you did not
make them available.

I remember that you didn't give any paragraph numbers
between 1 and 2865, and that you didn't read
any passages from the Catechism.

I remember that you insisted to say that the Catechism
of the Catholic Church contained serious errors,
among others in the relations between Church and State.
You said that the Catechism intentionally omitted
to say that Natural Law was part of the Church's
jurisdiction, and not the State's.

Then, you gave an example of the consequences of
this supposed error of omission: the French laws which
forbid Catholics to pray publicly.

Let's attempt a scientific experiment: I now open my
copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and I
look for "Natural Law" in the index. Bang: "Natural Law,
Magisterium of the Church and Natural Law, #2036:
[Translator's note: this is true in the index of the
French edition by Centurion/Cerf/Fleurus-Mame, but not
in my English copy (somewhat of a pocket format) by
Doubleday, First Image Books, April 1995]

	The authority of the Magisterium extends also to the
	specific precepts of the natural law, because their
	observance, demanded by the Creator, is necessary
	for salvation.

Can this authority err? No, preceding paragraph:

	The supreme degree of participation in the authority
	of Christ is ensured by the charism of infallibility.
	This infallibility extends [... also] to all those
	elements of doctrine, including morals [...].

Any conflict between the Church and State, concering
Natural Law, must be won by the Church, according
to that Catechism.

Moreover, an unjust law is not a law: #1902:

	A human law has the character of law to the extent that it
	accords with right reason, and thus derives from the eternal
	law. Insofar as it falls short of right reason it is said to
	be an unjust law, and thus has not so much the nature of law
	as of a kind of violence.

Claiming that unjust "laws" in France are an example
of serious omissions in the Catechism of the Catholic
Church is a calumny.

What is worse is not that sixty seconds of reading are enough
to demolish your accusations. No, what is worse is that
it's normally Protestants who perform this kind of manoeuvre.
They take a little quote from the Catechism, interpret
it out of context, throw accusations, then run away...

You have amply demonstrated your "courage" to present
your shaky theories in front of defenseless women and
children. I now challenge you to present them in front
of me, in public.

Cheers,

Stefan

5) Post-Scriptum

Some readers of this site sent me objections against the Catechism of the Catholic Church, objections Father Gouy himself used in his sermon on 2011-Nov-20. I therefore added an article about this topic:

Can A Catholic Obstinately Claim That The CCC Contains Serious Doctrinal Errors?

I also sent a hyperlink of this correspondence to my local Bishop, with no apparent result. (I heard from two separate sources, one close to the Bishop, and one close to Fr. Gouy, that the Bishop did indeed get this information.) I'm not surprised by this lack of reaction, given the fundamental demands I've been making about the CCC, ever since I started this web site!

The feedback from some parishioners, based on a few conversations, seems to be that:

1) "Attacking a priest is like attacking the Church, therefore you're nasty." First, I don't attack the priest, I attack his errors. Second, how come you cheer me on when I attack the errors of other priests, like Raymond Gravel? They are both wrong about the same thing: they both claim CCC contains serious errors! Third, I'm not throwing bricks or molotov cocktails at a priest, I'm just asking him to publicly reassert his faithfulness to the Magisterium. Why is this so hard and painful? If a good husband was asked to publicly declare his love for his wife and kids, would his reaction be to pretend he never heard the question? Would a good husband react by telling everybody around him to "stay away from that lost sheep that keeps asking embarassing questions"?

2) "It's immoral to reveal someone's private e-mails." First, I don't think I'm revealing much with this little e-mail from Fr. Gouy! Second, I had to show everybody that I started by contacting Fr. Gouy secretly. So I needed to prove that he did get and read my first e-mail.

3) "You're the only one who claims there was a problem with his sermons." First, No. Second, if I've misinterpreted those sermons, why not make them public and end this whole affair? After all, the seal of the confessional isn't made for the pulpit. And I can't imagine the Curé d'Ars trying to hide his sermons... Third, most of the parishioners I spoke with were not even aware of the distinction between a universal catechism, and a local catechism. Most had no idea what an ex cathedra declaration looks like. One of them even said he had never heard of the word "Magisterium" before! And many of them regularly attend FSSPX services without blinking...

4) "Everybody is against you!" You mean very few people in this Province are willing to take risks to defend the Pope and the Magisterium? Wow! Shocking! I never would have guessed!
;-)

Seriously, I pray daily for the Pope and all the Bishops and Priests. Their vocation is very difficult, and perhaps more difficult these days than ever before in the Church's history. Let's all pray so that the Virgin Mary, Mother of Priests, will intercede to solve this problem!