Fr. Francois Chazal


Date and Time:

Sunday November 10th at 12:30 pm (confessions at 12 pm)



Italian Canadian Club of Milton

104 Tremaine Road, Milton, ON L9T 2W9




Father Chazal will also say Mass in St. Catharines, Ontario, on November 10th. Here are the details:


Date and Time:

Sunday November 10th at 6:30 pm (confessions at 6 pm)



Quality Hotel Parkway Convention Centre (also known as the Holiday Inn & Suites St. Catharines Conference Centre)

327 Ontario Street

St. Catharines, ON

L2R 5L3





Christine Saul

Secretary, Our Lady of Good Success Chapel

(519) 927-9999

 | Posted by | Categories: Mass Schedule |

This story was given to me by a Catholic friend. A quick search on the internet to try to corroborate the story turned up sites that were not Traditional. Because of that, I was almost tempted to dismiss the story. Then, when visiting with another friend, I related the story and wondered if a serious investigation had ever been conducted by the local bishop. My friend suggested that, already before Vatican II, bishops downplayed or ignored miracles as miracles did not fit in with their ecumenical agenda.


In an attempt to verify that this miracle did take place, we contacted someone who is putting together a book about the miracle and about the life of the priest connected with the miracle. Another person, who knew the priest, confirmed that the present-day bishops are not in favour of hearing about miracles in their dioceses and have done all they could to destroy belief in this miracle.


If anyone has further information about this miracle or on the impact that it had on the parish, please contact us.


Sister Constance




Eucharistic miracle in Alberta, Canada


On July 18, 1946, Father Gino C. Violini stood before a small wooden church in a little town nestled in the foothills of the Canadian Rockies in Southern Alberta. St. Joseph’s was a forlorn, nearly-abandoned little mission church.


A small group of people gathered around this man dressed in mourning. They said they didn’t need a priest; Cowley didn’t need a priest, and if it ever came to pass that they needed one, they would inform Bishop Carroll of the fact. Furthermore, they didn’t want to see him reading his breviary, and he could get rid of that cassock.


He celebrated his first Mass at St. Joseph’s the following Sunday. There were nine people in the pews. Well, he had to start somewhere, and he delivered the best sermon ever, in his opinion, to those nine people. The following Sunday, there were only four who had come to adore their God.
The next two years were not crowned with success. The collection was laughable. He could afford a loaf of bread which he’d cut into seven parts, one part for each day of the week, and feasted on dandelion salad. Winter is an especially cruel season in Cowley, and he’d find his blankets snow covered when he awoke in the morning, as the rectory walls were split open from the many seasons that had dried and shrunk the logs apart. His first Christmas collection was a dollar and thirteen cents. The church was no warmer than the rectory, so the water would freeze in the cruets, even though he placed them on a little coal stove.
Father had had it. One day he sat down and wrote a sixteen-page letter, addressed to Bishop Francis P. Carroll, the gist of which was — this town is a write-off, and I want to stamp the dust of it off my feet. The Bishop rejected each and all of his requests for a transfer, and told him to stay put. He had full confidence in Father Violini, and he expected him to bring about a full Catholic revival in this parish, which had been so long neglected. After the latest of these rebuffs, Father was ready to pray for a noble death. But he was in for a great revelation.
On the feast of Corpus Christi, he awoke early and headed for the church for morning prayers. As he walked to the church, he noticed the front door hanging off its hinges. He hurried in and gazed at a scene of great destruction. The walls were in shambles, the statues destroyed and then he noticed the tabernacle had been split open and the consecrated Hosts were scattered down the main aisle. One by one, he gathered them up, counting each one. They were all there except the large Benediction Host which he could find nowhere.
It was raining, The gray sky reflected his anguish. He notified Father Harrington of the Crowsnest deanery who quickly organized a search party of some two-thousand people. They searched Bellevue and Hillcrest, Blairemore and Coleman; some came from as far as Michel and Natal in British Columbia, yet none of the people of Cowley would help. The search party combed miles of Highway 3. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police picked up two suspects at Cowley, and questioned them at Blairemore. They had stolen a pickup truck, and abandoned it down the highway when the police had discovered them.
Father Gino recognized them as transients from Lethbridge who had been seated next to him at a baseball game a couple days before, and who were looking to find work in the coal mines at Crowsnest Pass. He listened to the questioning by Sergeant Parsons: “Remember, it may not mean much to you or to me, but you fellows stole his Jesus.” Father explained the meaning of the Blessed Sacrament to them, and how precious it is to Catholics. He then offered to drop all the charges if they would tell him where they had discarded the Host.
Touched by his explanation, they began to show remorse and offered to help find It. One admitted to having discarded it through the truck window just before the police took them into custody. He didn’t know what it was, but he knew it was incriminating evidence. The rain had hardly stopped when they all piled into the police cruiser, the two suspects still handcuffed. Father calculated that if the Host had been dropped as these two men had said, the search parties would surely have found it if the rain had not dissolved it. It was about six o’clock that evening when they arrived at the spot. The sky was clearing; there was a bit of blue in the West.
As they rounded a corner east of Bellevue, they all saw the Host suspended in midair beside the highway. Beautiful rays of coloured light shone from it. Even before the car had stopped, Father leaped from the car and ran towards this astonishing sight. Sergeant Parsons was right behind him. Father fell to his knees in adoration, overcome with joy and wonder. Sergeant Parsons did likewise, and landed in a pool of mud.
Father stood up and reached for the Host. It looked as white and fresh as the day he had consecrated it. As he touched it, they heard: “Father Gino, please take me back to Cowley.”
Here was Christ on the road, asking to be returned to a desecrated church; to a parish that Father had long wanted to leave. As they returned to Cowley, Sergeant Parson’s eyes constantly left the road to gaze at the wonder Father held there, beside him. The Bishop arrived the next day. He told Father Gino that he would be the one to rededicate the church. The Bishop prayed with him in the devastated sanctuary. As he finished, he turned to Father Gino to say: “Great changes will soon take place in this parish.”
Sergeant Parsons came to ask for instruction a few days later. His wife and children soon joined him, and later two of his constables from Pincher Creek. As time went on, more and more Catholics began to return to their church. The parish mission was so popular that the beer hall shut down when it was in progress. The patrons, many of whom were not Catholic, would carry the bar stools to the church to listen to Father’s sermons. They even had to take out the pot-bellied stove to make room for everyone.
The little church, so long abandoned, was now full to overflowing every Sunday.
Paul Fournier

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |

The November/December 2013 issue of the Recusant is now available here for download.

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

Number CCCXXIX November 2nd 2013




Regularly over the last 20 years I have said that the Society of St Pius X could fail. Colleagues never liked me saying it, and contrary to what some people think, I did not enjoy saying it either, but here we are. Here for instance is a quotation sent to me recently by a reader, taken from an ordinations sermon I gave in 1984, and which of course I had completely forgotten:–


“At the beginning of the Church Militant Jesus Christ led his followers through the catacombs and persecution out into the open, and at the end of the Church Militant He may well lead them from the tent in the open field through persecution back to the catacombs. If it comes to that, and if we make it to the catacombs, for many of us it will certainly not have been without the Society but back in the catacombs we may have to do without the Society (…). Dear seminarians! Regularly I tell them (…) that the whole world is against them; that the whole world is going to hell in a hand-basket; that the Society of St. Pius X could easily perish; that the future is dark and where there is no gloom it is full of doom. Do you know, I do believe that if any of my dire forebodings actually came true, seminarians would be pleasantly surprised?”


And what do I think I see now in the “Resistance”? The painful but steady emergence of the joyful remnant of Catholics from the remnant of Traditionalists who in their time emerged from the ruins of Vatican II. Nothing yet persuades me of the need for a structure or a seminary to replace those of the SSPX, but these are early days in the history of the Resistance. What I do think is needed is a base of Resistance operations in England, not far from the Continent nor from London airports, bricks and mortar to lend some solidity to the Resistance, and to provide, for instance, a refuge where priests can recuperate for at least a few days, under no kind of pressure, from the real hardships of today’s apostolate.


The house has been chosen, it does exist, we have agreed to buy, and donations are coming in, but we do now need both £40,000 by the end of November and another £360,000 by mid-December. I do not like making promises, but with the help of God I have no intention of abandoning the defence of the Faith, whatever form that defence may take over the next several years. Please help, and in today’s shadow of tomorrow’s collapse of currencies, do think of making a heavenly investment guaranteed by the whole host of Heaven. Bless you for any and all donations. I attach again details of means of payment.


Kyrie eleison.


* In ANY CURRENCY small credit- or debit-card contributions from anywhere in the world can easily reach us via PayPal. ( Go towww.paypal.com/sendmoney and send the contribution to buildingfund@stmarcelinitiative.com)


*Contributions in POUNDS STERLING by banker’s draft or check should be made out and sent to the St Marcel Initiative, P.O. Box 423, Deal CT 14 4BF, England.


* Banker’s drafts or checks in US DOLLARS should likewise be made out to St Marcel Initiative and sent to 9051 Watson Rd., Suite 279, Crestwood, MO 63126, USA (the US contributions will soon be tax-deductible).


* In EUROS, checks made out to “Institut Culturel St Benoît” should be posted to ICSB, BP 60232, F78002 Versailles Cedex, France. Euros can also be sent by wire transfer from inside France to RIB – 20041 01012 6704 149J033 09; from outside France to the International Bank Account Number IBAN – FR85 2004 1010 1267 0414 9J03 309, with BIC – PSSTFRPPSCE


* For other bank wire transfers, please write to us for details at buildingfund@dinoscopus.org, or, in the USA, use the convenient “e-check/bank wire” form at www.stmarcelinitiative.com.

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

Here is a sermon given by Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer on Sunday October 20, 2013 in Boston, Kentucky.  Father speaks about the statements made by Bishop Fellay at the recent Angelus Conference.  For those who continue to support Bishop Fellay and the neo-SSPX, please take the time to listen to this sermon.  You are being fooled!



 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |


20 October 2013

Friends of OLGS Chapel are preparing to celebrate the First Year Anniversary of their stance against Modernism and their faithfulness to Eternal Rome.


On the afternoon of October 27th, there will be a celebration featuring music, drama and various presentations/brief discussions.


– review what happened in the Resistance in Year One

– what steps are required to bring the Mass to Toronto

– building of the altar

– presentation on the vestments

– finance report

– volunteers – driving people to Mass, contingency planning for bad weather, recognition to past volunteers

– locating Mass Centers – close to airport, parking, permit food, low price, seat 50 people

– material display – Recusant, books, Eleison Comments, computer screen with blog postings, etc

– how to navigate this site, how to post/comment, writers needed, first year’s postings

– how to obtain books, sermons, information (navigate internet)

– how to use ipods to listen to sermons – good for people without internet

– music – learn to sing Kyriale & chant, hymns, future musical events

– plan future events such as pilgrimages, musical events, etc.


If you wish to contact us, please call 519-927-9999.

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |

Here is an extract taken from a sermon given by Fr. David Hewko on Sunday October 13, 2013 in Post Falls, Idaho.  Each and every baptized Catholic has the duty to resist the Liberalism of Rome and the neo-SSPX.  We cannot support an entity that has gone liberal (e.g., neo-SSPX).  We must do whatever we morally can to stop assisting at neo-SSPX Masses.


1) Download the extract here:

Fr. Hewko Sermon Extract




2) Listen here (place your mouse pointer to the left of the “00:00” time indicator and then left click on your mouse):


The audio of the full sermon can be found here:


 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized | Tagged: |


Yes, I am being sarcastic.

In the article linked-to below, John Vennari reports on Bishop Fellay’s talk at the 2013 Angelus Press Conference, which took place a mere two days ago. He includes several extensive quotes. See below for some comment on these quotes.


“We have in front of us a genuine modernist!”
“The situation in the Church is a real disaster, and Pope Francis is making it 10,000 times worse!”
And Benedict XVI…? He was every bit as much a modernist. But it wasn’t as obvious. He “looked traditional” (well, a little bit anyway) on the outside. Which of the two is the more dangerous?

(Please note, I am not making these quotes up! Follow the link and see for yourself!)
“When we see what is happening now [under Pope Francis] we thank God, we thank God, we have been preserved from any kind of Agreement from last year. And we may say that one of the fruits of the [Rosary] Crusade we did is that we have been preserved from such a misfortune. Thank God.”
Err… …hold on a moment! Who was it who told you not to do it? And where are they now? God used them as His instrument in preserving you from the agreement you so much wanted. ‘Thank God’ is easy to say, but how have you shown Him your gratitude?

“To imagine that some people continue to pretend we are decided [still] to get an Agreement with Rome. Poor people. I really challenge them to prove they mean. They pretend that I think something else from what I do. They are not in my head.”
Poor people! After all, fancy imagining that they can understand what Bishop Fellay thinks merely by listening to him say what he thinks! Imagining that they know his doctrinal position merely because they read a Doctrinal Declaration written by him! Since when was what Bishop Fellay says the same as what he thinks? You’re not in his head! Poor you!

“Any kind of direction for recognition ended when they gave me the document to sign on June 13, 2012.”
Arguably it ended when the Romans decided to re-write your document in such a way that they knew you wouldn’t be able to accept. And why might they have done that? Perhaps it all really ended on the day when the letter of the three Bishops was made public…

“I told them from the start in September the previous year that we cannot accept this ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ because it is not true, it is not real. … So we do not accept it. The Council is not in continuity with Tradition. It’s not.”
That’s strange. I seem to recall reading this somewhere recently:
“The affirmations of the Second Vatican Council and of the later Pontifical Magisterium relating to the relationship between the Church and the non-Catholic Christian confessions, as well as the social duty of religion and the right to religious liberty, whose formulation is with difficulty reconcilable with prior doctrinal affirmations from the Magisterium, must be understood in the light of the whole, uninterrupted Tradition, in a manner coherent with the truths previously taught by the Magisterium of the Church, without accepting any interpretation of these affirmations whatsoever that would expose Catholic doctrine to opposition or rupture with Tradition and with this Magisterium.”

“It has never been our intention to pretend either that the Council would be considered as good, or the New Mass would be ‘legitimate’ ”
“The [April 15, 2012] text we presented to Rome was a very, shall we say, delicate text that was supposed to be understood correctly;”
‘Correctly’…?! So, not according to what it actually says, then? Only according to what you need it to mean on a given day, in front of a given audience or in a given circumstance?
Do words still have objective meaning, or are we now at the stage where the only person who can understand a doctrinal statement is the person making it, according to what’s “in his head’…? Is this anything less than classic modernism?


“And so take any kind of sentences from the text without this principle is just to take sentences that have never been our thinking and our life. These phrases in themselves are ambiguous…”
Well, firstly, what I have quoted above is an entire paragraph (No.5). If it cannot be understood on its own, then words have lost their meaning.
Secondly, how is it ambiguous? Let’s take another example:
“We declare that we recognise the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention to do what the Church does according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John-Paul II.”
An ambiguous text is capable of bearing at least two meanings. That’s what the word means. The above quoted paragraph says that the new Mass and new sacramentary rituals were legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and JPII. That’s not an interpretation, it’s simply what it says. Where is the ambiguity? There is none.

“Unfortunately, maybe that was too subtle and that’s why we withdrew that text, because it was not clear enough as it was written.”
As shown above, it is plain and straightforward. The text is not in the least bit “subtle” any more than it is “ambiguous.” And you didn’t withdraw it: Rome rejected it.
So much for Bishop Fellay’s defence of his own actions (if it can really even be called a defence!) version, and his version of what really happened last year, according to his own memory. Let’s just say his memory appears to be playing tricks on him! He also, according to the linked article, had plenty to say about Fatima and the “scary times” in which we are living. When Bishop Williamson preaches this way, we know he means it because, right or wrong, he has been giving the same consistent message for thrirty years and more. The same cannot be said of Bishop Fellay. He also comments on Pope Francis. It has taken him until now, a mere six months of continuing scandals. Perhaps Bishop Fellay felt even that he could not get away with ignoring it forever!

“In the beginning of the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI, I said, ‘the crisis in the Church will continue, but the Pope is trying to put on the brakes.’ ”
And here’s what you said at the end of his Pontificate (though at that stage, you didn’t realise that the end was so near!):
“If you want another example well we finish with this, an image of what kind of time do we have, or are we in. At a certain moment, towards the end of winter, you see on the trees new buds, they just come out. It’s a little thing there. When you see that, you know, spring will come. But you start to say, spring is there, people will tell you, hey, come on. It’s winter! It’s freezing! It’s snowing! It’s icy! It’s windy! Don’t say it’s spring! It’s not true! It’s winter! And we say, “Both are right. It’s still winter.” And then I say, if you look at the situation in the Church, it’s still winter. But we start to see the little signs that start to say that spring is coming. … But I may say, that’s precisely where we are now. In that very delicate time between winter and spring.” (Canada, 28th December 2012)

More could be said, but is it really necessary? And if it is, what is the use? The hypocrisy and dishonesty are worthy of earning Bishop Fellay a place along side Tony Blair, David Cameron, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and all the other great worthies in the Pantheon of modern politicians. Run away from this. Run far, far away. And stay there. Preserve your sanity, preserve the Faith, and let this be an abject lesson in what happens when we temporise with the enemies of God’s Church and begin telling little white lies to try to cover our tracks.
“That’s pure Modernism, my dear brethren. We have in front of us a genuine Modernist.”
‘And why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother’ s eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye?’ (Mt. 7,3)

 | Posted by | Categories: Uncategorized |