CathInfo.com

Well-said, Plenus Venter!

I would like to repeat this part:

Also, with regards Fr Hewko, I think it is regrettable to speak in praise of him without warning of the evil stand he has taken in the current crisis. After supporting Fr Pfeiffer in his outrageously exaggerated and unjust attack on Bishop Williamson, he separated from the Resistance, and while he has happily distanced himself from a Fr Pfeiffer going deeper and deeper into error and iniquity, he nonetheless remains attached to no bishop, one would have to say separated from the Church, leading faithful with him down a dead end, away from the hierarchy and without sacraments for long periods of time for many scattered around the world whom he allows to see in him the only (with maybe one or two exceptions) faithful priest. It is sad to have to say such things about a once fine priest, but he can no longer be held up as an example to follow. 

Yes, Fr. Hewko made some mistakes but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt that he learned from them.  He did break from Fr. Pfeiffer.  I wouldn’t be surprised if he had been under the same diabolical influences as Fr. Pfeiffer.

I knew Fr. Hewko at seminary and he’s a bit more of a passive personality so that I can see him being manipulated by the aggressive assertiveness of Fr. Pfeiffer.

Yes, he's passive, and yes, breaking with Fr. Pfeiffer was an ounce of progress in the right direction.

But it's unjust that he's not ACTIVELY defending Bp. Williamson and atoning for any times he went overboard in the past. That includes attacking countless Resistance priests who are without significant faults to publicly criticize.

Being part of Pfeifferville and then subsequently failing to denounce specific errors during that dark chapter of his past has caused me to lose most respect I had for him. If you make a mistake, fine. Admit it, and ATONE FOR IT which includes trying to undo as many of the damages/injustices YOU participated in as possible. That is a fundamental, inescapable part of any REAL contrition or REAL change of heart.

But any Trad priest who fails to attach himself to a faithful Traditional bishop is flawed and frankly to be avoided, in my opinion.

That includes Fr. Garcia, who had no other issues that I know of. Merely choosing to be a maverick is a huge flaw. And I'm sure the Church agrees with me.
If this were 1970 and you felt/believed that the whole body of bishops abandoned you, that would be one thing. But there are several well-known faithful Traditional bishops, both sedevacantist, non-sedevacantist, and almost-Conciliar alive today.

If your position is so unique (like those belonging to the 806th Gender, population: 1) that you can't find a bishop to follow, then maybe you need to gain an ounce of humility and ask yourself why you're so darn special.

If you're the only one in the world, than MAYBE just maybe YOU'RE in the wrong.

But any Trad priest who fails to attach himself to a faithful Traditional bishop is flawed and frankly to be avoided, in my opinion.

??  +W is actively and openly encouraging a decentralized Trad structure; the complete opposite of the new-sspx.  I think your comments are true, to a degree, but also outdated based on current circuмstances.