CathInfo.com

We're having some of the same arguments we had back during the Ambrose Moran debacle (God has blessed me with a good memory, which I am trying to use for good purposes, like the welfare of the faithful remnant of Traditional Catholics everywhere)

Some people think it's "mean" or "uncharitable" to put prospective priests or bishops "through the ringer" -- but that is not Catholic thought. That is sentimentalism (if it's the layman's idea) and if such thinking comes from the priest/bishop himself, it's cultism and tyranny.

We normally don't put priests through the ringer IN NORMAL TIMES. When everything is done officially by the Church, then it's all none of our business. A priest shows up, we submit to him. That is healthy and Catholic -- in normal times. Might I point out that complete submission to the Pope is also normally a healthy Catholic behavior? But again, these are not normal times. Hello, McFly!!!

Words "Crisis in the Church" mean anything to you??

When priests get formed, trained, ordained outside official structures, the Faithful need certainty about their priests. In fact, one of the main justifications for the Traditional movement is that the Faithful have a God-given right to 100% certain Sacraments, and Sacraments that won't risk or tend to destroy their Faith itself. One can argue about the validity of Novus Ordo Masses and sacraments, but one CANNOT say that Novus Ordo ordinations/Masses/sacraments are 100% certain. And that alone is enough reason to leave them by the wayside and seek out true Sacraments from traditional priests wherever they can get them -- which is basically the charter and foundation of the Traditional Movement.

If you confess a mortal sin to an "impostor", or a man who is not a priest (though he might look and act like one), that sin is not forgiven. We're talking about more than just life and death here, folks. We're talking about eternal heaven and hell!

So yes, it's important, and any well-trained priest would be the first to agree with me, Mithrandylan, and Sean Johnson. I notice all the ex-seminarians are lining up behind Mithrandylan's last post...

If Fr. Francis isn't the first to want to prove his Consecrator's validity, or doesn't understand why we Traditional Catholics are concerned with such, then he obviously received an inferior Seminary training, and perhaps it's best that we collectively allocate this priest to deathbeds and emergencies only (when no other priest is available)...

As Mithrandylan also wisely pointed out, validity is the most important concern. But even if that were proven (which it hasn't been), there is still the huge elephant in the room -- this priest's foolish choice of OLMC "seminary" for his priestly training.

And don't give me, "Come on, what choice did he have?"

If he had opted to self-study with a pile of pre-Vatican II Catholic books (the Summa, Denzinger, The Spiritual Life by Fr. Tanqueray, moral theology, all the classics written by saints, etc.) and did an apprenticeship with some bishop or priest, then I would have WAY more respect for his judgement, intellect, and wisdom.

But OLMC? Seriously? Who gives a place like that respect enough to spend several years there? It's a complete joke to anyone with a brain. I mean, this man was bossed around by Pablo for years. He drank the Pfeifferville Kool-aid for years. And he stayed for a long time! He thought it was appropriate and fine for an apostate, superstitious man (with no seminary or theological training whatsoever) to regularly be in charge of a seminary.

That speaks to a certain deficiency.

To give JUST ONE example of Pfeifferville Kool-aid which any normal intellect would gag on: "Bishop Williamson and Bishop Zendejas are bad. But Ambrose Moran is good!"  and let's not forget, "All ye true Traditional Catholics: you must only attend Mass by Fr. Pfeiffer, Fr. Hewko, or a priest on good terms with us. After all, we ARE the Church!" I don't care if he actually said those very words; that is precisely his doctrine, proven by his countless words and actions.

P.S.

Knowing the Internet population, I have to make everything explicit.

I have nothing against Fr. Francis personally. This is all about Catholic doctrine. I'm sure he's very "nithe" and says his prayers. I'm sure he's very pious.

But I'm with St. Teresa of Avila on this matter -- she would rather have a LEARNED spiritual director than a PIOUS one. And in 2017 she'd be even more adamant about it. In this confusing world with a Crisis in the Church, we need wise, prudent priests, priests of sound judgment. Priests who can untangle in the confessional the complicated matters we laymen have to deal with. Priests who can guide us through this wilderness -- to help us be as wise as serpents but simple as doves. Priests to point out all the traps and deceptions of the devil during this time of "diabolical disorientation".