What they did to their children is horrifying. There's just no justification for that and why did Fr. Feeney permit it?

Not sure what book you are referring to?  

I had read a book written by an ex member of Father Feeney's Slaves of the Immaculate Heart apostolate.

In his final chapter of his horrifying account, he explained how he drove out West in a van, picked up a woman, had with sex her and was "liberated" from the Feeenyites.

This is when we knew the book was a hit piece written by a Jєω. 
The Jєωs even made a B-rated horror movie about Father Feeney's apostolate.

Observation/Question:   Why, as Fr. Robinson gets older, do his eyes become smaller and his nose larger?   Is this the Pinnochio syndrome?  



When we consider all the underhanded propaganda the SSPX fathers have initiated, we should be concerned about their special place in Hell.

1.  Fr. Pfeiffer and Fr. Laisney wrote an anti Father Feeney book in 2001.  



It was full of shoddy scholarship.  
The over achiever authors were too busy to make sound arguments.

More hit piece propaganda I can think of:

2. 1980 Fr. Cekada's attack on the Order of St. John, who supported Father Wathen.  
   Very poor scholarship, and effectively debunked by Father Wathen a year later.

3. Attack on Thuc line priests and Bishops.  Ongoing doctrine at the SSPX to minimize TLM competition.

4. 1984 "Open Letter to Confused Catholics"
  Inserted into the book was "Universal Salvation via BOD, BOB and intrinsic Baptism inscribed on every man's heart".   Rahner bunk.

5. 2008 Two articles in the Angelus shilling for the validity of the Novus ordo bastard sacramanent of Holy Orders.

5. 2009 Attack on +W and anti-h0Ɩ0cαųst movement.

6. 2010:  Discovery of a Jєωιѕн mossad operative (Max Krah) within the top ranks of the SSPX.

7. 2015 Siscoe & Salza books:   Total hireling bullsh*t propaganda, attempting to justify reconciliation with the Pachamama pope.

8.  Increased attacks on SSPX resistance and independent TLM venues to divert criticism from SSPX regularization with newChurch.


If you can think of others, please add them.

 9. 2011 Bp. Fellay's suppression of the publication of +ABL's 238 Sermons, the resulting lawsuit against Father Schoonbroodt. 
    Then, the SSPX altercation of theses sermons, as discovered by SSPX Germany and reported by former Cathinfo member, Ethelred.

That makes me even more convinced of the Feeneyite position ...

Just because it’s coming from Fr. Robinson.

If I come to a conclusion on something due to evidence, finding some authority I respect agreed with me (that I didn't know about previously) might be additional evidence and confirm my conclusion. 

But I just don't see an impact if I find that someone I don't respect opposes my conclusion. So what?

The decision to raise their children communally with no involvement from the parents is bizarre.

Give the whole story.  During these battles with the Church liberals attacking them, many of the members of St. Benedict Center felt drawn to the religious life, indeed, to beginning an Order dedicated to defending the Faith and orthodox doctrines.  They knew what was coming to the Church.  Many of these people were married.  Some had children.  As has happened with other religious, including saints, with the agreement of each spouse, they began the MICM.  Fr. Leonard Feeney was the Superior, and co-Founder with Sr. Catherine Clarke and Brother Francis Maluf.  It was unusual for these modern times, but not in Church history - and the finger of Our Lady was there.  The children involved because of the circuмstances, were the happiest on the face of the earth. Naturally, it was important that this particular order would be infiltrated, and stress was placed on "getting to" the children, and breaking them up.  Years later, after several attempts, Jєωs were able to further "get to" some who had left and get them to write, or back, disparaging books.  Neither are they traditional Catholics.  Again, Fr. Feeney was the worst nightmare of the enemies of the Church.  A famous, able priest, who was rising in defense of No Salvation, just as they were about to throw the Ecuмenism bomb against the Church.  He had to go.  And his "group" with him.    
Fr. Robinson had Fr. Wathen as priest.  For him to enter SSPX and "rise," if such was his interest, (indeed, to perhaps even enter), he would have to put him down - but also, to rise in SSPX it is worth a few points to "make your bones" as an anti-Fr. Feeney mouthpiece.  But he more Fr. Robinson does open his mouth on these things, the worse he gets.  And because he once knew better, he will have to answer for it.  Sometimes, thinking yourself smarter than everybody, because it is what you have heard all your life, turns into you just being the bigger fool on that account. 

Here is a follow up video from Fr. Robinson. He makes many statements without providing one souce of the magesterium to backup his claims.



He says the Canon approves of catechumens rite of Christian Buriel but fails to mention that was not allowed until the cc 1917.

I haven’t watched the latest video but the title is logically absurd.  Did Fr. Robinson approve the title?  If so, he needs a refresher course in logic.  “Catholics are not Catholic.”

And of course Siscoe and Salza say otherwise.  Joe Bıdɛn is a Catholic in good standing: it’s only sedevacantists who are outside the Church.  Heck there’s a higher likelihood of some Hindu in Tibet being saved than some sedevacantist.

This title reflects how muddled the SSPX mindset has become.  In order to hold the corollary, that Modernists (like Jorge Bergoglio) are in fact Catholic, despite also being non-Catholic, they have to overturn logic itself.

Yes, this latest video is sloppy and lazy.  He creates a straw man caricature of a Modernist where it only applies to a small subset of Modernists, the more extreme ones.  There are much more subtle forms of Modernism, including that which HE HIMSELF exhibits in spades, that Catholics must be on guard against.  Bishop Williamson famously holds that we’ve ALL been infected to varying degrees.  It’s not something “out there” and external to us, but we must fight even the subtle forms of it in ourselves.  By the time it gets to the extreme portrayed by Fr. Robinson, it’s far too late.

So, according to your reasoning, you too are a Modernist, just not an extreme Modernist.   As an admitted Modernist yourself who professes to be a Catholic, on what basis do you believe Joe Biden is not a Catholic? 

Modernism is a condemned heresy. Holding even one modernist proposition ipso facto leads to excommunication. There is a decree of St Pius X saying so.

Heresy is not a. more or less severe infection, it is a severe crime.

Can you name a Modernist propositions from Pascendi?