I was a kid and got the privilege of meeting and having dinner with Fr. Leonard. I remember when the abbey in Cullman was still under construction. It's sad to know the story. [....] posted a sign that the abbey was closed for Mass. I suppose they were 'ordained' in the New Rite and started offering the Novus Ordo some time later. The parishioners regrouped near Huntsville and recieve a priest from the CMRI nowadays.
I claim no special knowledge of
the story[†], but perhaps you know it so well that without intending to, you overlooked points that ought to be stated explicitly (if accurate):
The chronological order was
not that the abbey was
constructed, its chapel was consecrated, some Catholics in Alabama eventually discovered that the new abbey was celebrating the
traditional Latin Mass, and
then traditional Catholics within a tolerable commuting distance became
parishoners, was it?
Wouldn't it be more accurate to write that some Catholics in Alabama discovered the
traditional Latin Mass being celebrated by the clergy that would eventually reside in Cullman, became
de facto parishoners, and for that reason, donated the bulk of the money used to
construct the abbey, to which they lost access for the
traditional Mass & sacraments after the prolonged illness and death of the
de facto abbot (who I assume is the aforementioned
Fr. Leonard), because his death made possible a
Novus Ordo coup by relatively newly arrived opportunistic young clergy who knew perfectly well what a subversive act of
disloyalty and
disenfranchisement they were committing.
So as I recall what I've read, those
parishioners who
regrouped have
already paid quite recently to build a site in which to attend the
traditional Latin Mass and receive the
traditional sacraments: Christ the King Abbey in
Cullman.
Please correct me if I misunderstood the story[‡] and if this reply is mistaken on facts or draws invalid conclusions.
-------
Note †: A search for "Cullman" & "Leonard" focused on <
http://www.traditio.com/> (via the input slot for "advanced search" that's marked "At this Web site or domain:") might suffice. But I don't know if their version of
the story might indulge in biases that reduce its accuracy.
Note ‡:
The story is really infuriating, even to myself, despite
not being personally affected. So maybe I indulged in
waaay too much
bold-face formatting.