I don't know who the individual is and I question whether or not the anonymous author should be trusted.  

Some of what he alleges about SGG seem eerily reminiscent of the charges made about the priests there as well as other traditional priests and bishops by another well-known blogger that I know to be false.  The first time I read these charges was in connection with a priest the bishop ordained (I don't remember his name, but many on the forum should remember him as he caused quite a stir) who essentially broke SGG apart.  While there might very well be some problems at SGG I have grave doubts about the accuracy and even the veracity of the blog.

Just some caveats: I don't know if the identification given above is correct or not. I don't know how it would be possible to know how many read or don't read it.

It seems to go hand-in-hand with the Pistrina Liturgica blog:



I don't know who the author of that site is, either. I would think that if one wanted to say extremely damning  things about a real person, it would behoove such an individual to step up and identify himself.

The Ramolla incident does seem to have hastened down the wind.

There is a continuing problem at SGG. I don't know where truth ends and embellishment begins, but I see a problem.

Whether the above bloggers are the correct instruments to get to the root of the problems, I just don't know enough to make such a judgment.

The author of pistrina liturgical is Craig Toth, he was briefly a teacher at Bp Ramollas seminary.  

Bp Ramolla was consecrated by Bp Dymek on orders from Bp Slupski.  He has a mass center in Germany and he visits the U.S. once or twice a year.

Quote from: Lighthouse

There is a continuing problem at SGG. I don't know where truth ends and embellishment begins, but I see a problem.

Could you enlighten us?  What is the "continuing problem"?  If you don't know where truth ends and embellishment begins, how do you know that there really is a problem?

Perhaps the writer simply didn't get a position at the chapel he thought he deserved and, in a fit of continuing anger, simply blogs about these "problems".

Is SGG losing parishioners?  Is it gaining parishioners?  Is it stagnant?  What makes you think there's a problem?  I mean, of course, other than the fact that there seems to be a lone blogger out there constantly talking about the problems at SGG.

The continuing problem is clerical abuse by the SGG clergy.  Also it is how the clergy behaves privately, financial misconduct, the Lotarskis, the fake ness of the overall church.

It's not a lone blogger is was 300 of their parioshoners who left in 2009-2010.

Church attendance is extremely down at SGG, the collections are getting smaller and smaller.  The number of parioshoners went from 900 in its heyday then down to 500 or so , it has gone  up over the last few years probably to 600-700, but it seems like it has gotten smaller in the past 18 months, Immaculate conception chapel has gotten bigger over the past 5 years, by a lot. They have over 900 parioshoners now, from 600 from 5 or so years ago.

Quote from: Alexandria

What sedevacantist group is in charge of Immaculate Conception?

SSPV

I wish we had the SSPV in my area.  I like them.

Could you enlighten us?  What is the "continuing problem"?  If you don't know where truth ends and embellishment begins, how do you know that there really is a problem?

Yes, sorry. In an attempt to be just, and not in engage in gossip, I ended up tying myself up in a way that was a misstatement of what I was trying to say.

I was there at the place and time. I know of things that are unsavory and definitely true. I don't see that anything has changed. For example, opaque financial dealings, and the strong presence of the school principal and his family. No one has even tried to offer a rebuttal to the charges.

There have also been things rumored that I have no way of verifying, however I haven't seen anything that the players do not seem capable of. or seems preposterous. I realize such a process does not lend itself to the truth. If I were to say that some person was capable of robbing a bank, it dos not mean he has actually done so.

Also, we must be careful to not enter into the procedures of the Donatists. A priest may be involved in certain personal sins that do not take away his powers as a priest. Where to draw the line between scandal and legitimate and necessary warning?

In the final analysis, however, one must judge one's moral landscape as a whole. One cannot turn one's children over to the wolves, which is the reason most traditionalists fled the N.O. I cannot think of one reason that would allow a person to conclude that it was acceptable to participate in such a mess.