Former FSSP Seminary Rector arrested again for violating pre-trial release agreement

Editor’s Note: Don’t presume an institute is opposed to globalism when they appoint men of this kind to be rectors of seminaries. This man, while rector, expelled a very good vocation I recommended to the institute, because “he kept the rules, we told everyone to keep”. Now after 15 years, I understand why they did so.

But don’t think other institutes are not similarly affected, since Archbishop Lebfebvre himself personally chose to send to the USA, as the first priest of his institute, a man who was later exposed as a serial pedophile. Likewise to Gabon.

And John Paul II, who cannot be a Saint, elevated and protected numerous pedophile protectors and pedos.

Only Benedict XVI began cleaning house. And that is why 99% of the clergy wanted him gone and do not want him back.

And thus, we should be very cautious with clergy who name the pedophile protector, Bergoglio, in the canon of the mass. As their insistence means more than we might think.

With Globalist Censorship growing daily, No one will ever know about the above article, if you do not share it.

7 thoughts on “Former FSSP Seminary Rector arrested again for violating pre-trial release agreement”

  1. Laymen, Please be sure to remember Pope Benedict daily in your morning offering and rosary.

  2. If the CatholicChurch proclaims someone a Saint is that always a ” de fide” statement ? I always thought it was.Did Benedict 16 proclaim him a Saint ? And, if he did, and made a bad mistake in doing so, does that mean he ( Benedict 16) might not be a Pope ?.

    1. John Paul II was “canonized” by Bergoglio, and so, no he is not canonically a saint, because an antipope cannot cannonize anyone.

      But Saints are not infallible. Even St. Thomas argued against the immaculate conception of Our Lady, for example, or thought that it was reasonable to hold that the world was eternal, in contradiction to revelation which says it was created by God.

  3. I would be very cautious against judging a man before he has had the opportunity to defend himself. A one-off experience of disappointment over a single candidate one has recommended does not constitute a seated jury. The very fact that the purported violation of ROR is not divulged may be a question of avoiding prejudice; then again, it may be part of an attack on a priest whose pro-life reputation has been non-stop. I consider the likelihood of a priest’s being able to enjoy an unsullied record for some 37 years in the current climate before he is accused out of the blue. Time will tell; in the meanwhile, I do not presume an office that is not mine.

    1. Presumption is not required, when the lawyer for the defense does not contest in court that the hard drive belongs to the defendant and was always in his custody. The consistent presumption of innocence for this priest has no more rational basis. This is especially true since it was an external hard drive, which by its very nature is used only to archive material that is desired to be kept and to hide or conceal it from others.

  4. PS Parole is an early-release with conditions from a sentence. Father has not yet been tried, let alone convicted or sentenced.

Comments are closed.