Quote from: Pilar

I believe Fr. Hewko to be a holy priest, but I also wonder if he is not in an incredibly difficult situation.  

Can you give some examples of his holiness?

Fr. Hewko has been saying Mass independent of his SSPX superiors for several years now, and has been associating with "Resistance" priests during this time, and has enumerated publicly the shortcomings of the SSPX leadership, but he has not been formally expelled from the SSPX.  Whenever anyone asks him why he has not been expelled he shrugs his shoulders and holds his palms upwards.  

Maybe I'm the only one willing to say this, but I believe that it is because of his holiness that Menzingen doesn't dare issue his second and third letters of expulsion, because they cannot safely penetrate the spiritual protection that God has provided to Fr. David Hewko.  And frankly, I think that the Society leadership is afraid of what would happen to them if they would try to pierce through that barrier.

In the annals of the saints, this kind of thing is quite common.  Whenever a saint was asked why they're seemingly immune from dangers commonplace among other people, they wouldn't have an answer, because their humility would prevent them from admitting that the reason they're protected is a spiritual one.

Pilgrims used to come to Ars in late 19th century France eager to meet the saint. When they approached Fr. John Vianney, he would appear puzzled while they would ask if he was the saint working many miracles.  Then he would direct them to his shrine of St. Philomena and he would say to them:





If you have any doubts, just ask Fr. Hewko if he prays to the Cure of Ars and to St. Philomena, and get ready for a quick download of infectious enthusiasm and zeal.

.

Fr Hewko is just as culpable for the sorry state of the seminary as fr Pfeiffer.  I've heard enough of his sanctity, he knows of all the evils and has done nothing. "The corruption of the best is the worst."

It is not fair to lump Fr. Hewko into the blame arena here.  It's not reasonable to say "he knows all the evils and has done nothing."  You have no idea what he has done.  

The reason you don't know what he has done is that he doesn't go around making his works known to all, and does not engage in elevating his own ego by way of taking credit for having done one thing or another.  He does not take issue with his associates in front of witnesses, even while he admonishes parents not to argue with each other in front of their children:  He practices what he preaches.

And regarding his culpability for the "sorry state of the seminary" goes, I'm sure if you ask him he would be eager to take full responsibility for everything that runs amok there, which is what anyone might expect a saint to say.  

Why were you not there putting out the fire when it was burning down the house?

You're right.  The house burned down and my absence is not an excuse, but it is the blame I deserve for not having been present to fight the fire.

The rest of the story:  He was in another state saying Mass at the time, but all he would have had to do was bilocate to then fight the out-of-state fire simultaneously.  But he would never say that, for to do so would be presumptuous.

.

Quote from: Matthew

I don't disagree with Pa ulFHC though. He is somehow complicit in this. He's involved whether or not he wants to be. He needs to stand up to Fr. Pfeiffer now, just as he stood up to Bishop Fellay and the SSPX 3 years ago. Come what may.

Are you saying that Paul FHC is complicit in this?  Just how would Paul FHC be complicit in this?  We know Paul and his family personally.  We know something of his history and background and have been in his company on a number of occasions, both in religious and social settings.  So naturally, it would be interesting to learn exactly what you mean by "complicit," Matt.

Hollingsworth, Matthew is not saying "he" regarding Paul FHC, but rather Fr. Hewko.

Corrected version:
I don't disagree with PaulFHC though.  Fr. Hewko is somehow complicit in this. He's involved whether or not he wants to be.   Fr. Hewko needs to stand up to Fr. Pfeiffer now, just as Fr. Hewko stood up to Bishop Fellay and the SSPX 3 years ago. Come what may.

There is a grain of truth there IMHO, but I would not presume to advise Fr. Hewko what to do.  We should PRAY for our priests, not criticize their judgments.

.

Matthew:

Quote

I don't disagree with Pa ulFHC though. He is somehow complicit in this. He's involved whether or not he wants to be. He needs to stand up to Fr. Pfeiffer now, just as he stood up to Bishop Fellay and the SSPX 3 years ago. Come what may.

Are you saying that Paul FHC is complicit in this?  Just how would Paul FHC be complicit in this?  We know Paul and his family personally.  We know something of his history and background and have been in his company on a number of occasions, both in religious and social settings.  So naturally, it would be interesting to learn exactly what you mean by "complicit," Matt.

Matthew is referring to Fr. H being complicit.

ADD: Sorry, I now see Neil clarified already.

Quote from: TheRealMcCoy

Quote from: Pilar

I believe Fr. Hewko to be a holy priest, but I also wonder if he is not in an incredibly difficult situation.  

Can you give some examples of his holiness?

Fr. Hewko has been saying Mass independent of his SSPX superiors for several years now, and has been associating with "Resistance" priests during this time, and has enumerated publicly the shortcomings of the SSPX leadership, but he has not been formally expelled from the SSPX.  Whenever anyone asks him why he has not been expelled he shrugs his shoulders and holds his palms upwards.  

Maybe I'm the only one willing to say this, but I believe that it is because of his holiness that Menzingen doesn't dare issue his second and third letters of expulsion, because they cannot safely penetrate the spiritual protection that God has provided to Fr. David Hewko.  And frankly, I think that the Society leadership is afraid of what would happen to them if they would try to pierce through that barrier.

In the annals of the saints, this kind of thing is quite common.  Whenever a saint was asked why they're seemingly immune from dangers commonplace among other people, they wouldn't have an answer, because their humility would prevent them from admitting that the reason they're protected is a spiritual one.

Pilgrims used to come to Ars in late 19th century France eager to meet the saint. When they approached Fr. John Vianney, he would appear puzzled while they would ask if he was the saint working many miracles.  Then he would direct them to his shrine of St. Philomena and he would say to them:

"Here is the saint who is responsible for these miracles.            
The miracles of Ars are all due to her holy intercession."          

If you have any doubts, just ask Fr. Hewko if he prays to the Cure of Ars and to St. Philomena, and get ready for a quick download of infectious enthusiasm and zeal.

.

Does Fr Hewko believe there are ever situations where divorce can be permitted?

Does Fr Hewko believe there are ever situations where divorce can be permitted?

You've changed your avatar to make a point, maybe now it's time to change your forum name to make a point, such as, change it to NonSequitur.

.

Quote from: TheRealMcCoy

Does Fr Hewko believe there are ever situations where divorce can be permitted?

You've changed your avatar to make a point, maybe now it's time to change your forum name to make a point, such as, change it to NonSequitur..

OK I'll make my point.  Do you think it's hypocritical of a priest to lead a rosary crusade in defense of marriage when the "help" is divorcing?   Wouldn't a better defense of marriage be to not support this person by firing them and sending them away?  Silence = consent

That's not the behavior of holiness.  And please, spare us platitudes about detraction and charity.

OK, I see that Matthew does not mean Paul FHC, when I read the post carefully.