CathInfo.com

Why didn’t the SSPX continue sending a priest to this church? How come it ended up with resistance? It seems people were coming. I don’t know how many people they need to make it worth their while. There are small SSPX chapels in UK where the congregation is not huge but they still keep going. But I suppose the distances in USA are far greater than in UK (obviously) so the logistics are more difficult? So is Fr Hoopes I dependant now from SSPX resistance? It was mentioned on another post that Bishop Ballini was sending the church in Michigan another priest?

Fr. Hoopes has trapped himself by telling different people different stories about the same dispute, while at the same time doing things that raise serious questions about consistency with traditional Catholic practice.

The biggest problem is the judicial astrology book. By itself, owning the book would not prove he practiced divination. But when you put it next to witness testimony that he described himself as practicing “magic” and handed out herbal mixtures to burn for protection from evil spirits, it stops looking like an innocent curiosity.

Moving the congregation out of an established church and into a fire hall only makes the whole situation more embarrassing.

I know Fr. Hoopes. In my view, the LifeSiteNews story is accurate. They were thorough in checking sources and facts, and Fr. Hoopes was given a chance to respond.

The first time I ever heard this “Bill became a Thucist” story was on this forum. That does not match the timeline or Fr. Hoopes’ own written explanation to Bill after leaving St. Charles. It looks like yet another explanation added after the fact.

And then there is the question of authority. Bishop Ballini has said he does not presently exercise ecclesiastical authority over Fr. Hoopes, and Bishop Zendejas has expressed serious concerns about him.

So at some point the faithful have to ask a simple question: if no bishop is clearly exercising authority over Fr. Hoopes, and his explanations keep changing, why should lay Catholics simply assume his ministry is trustworthy?

In short, because there is no Bishop vouching for Fr. Hoopes theology or ministry - lay people must judge for safety reasons.



Thus the meme is relevant:

According to what has been discussed on this forum, +Zendejas warned Bishop Williamson not to ordain Fr. Hoopes. Fr. Hoopes was then ordained to work with +Ballini in Ireland for three years, so presumably +Ballini expected him to remain under his direction for that assignment.

Hoopes left Ireland before the three-year period was completed. +Ballini has said he no longer exercised authority over Fr. Hoopes after he left. Hoopes then came to St. Charles and left after roughly the same amount of time.

According to +Ballini and +Zendejas, Fr. Hoopes may no longer be part of the Resistance. I believe Fr. Hoopes' theology is closer to that typically associated with +Thuc line bishops (sedevacantist) and may no longer be compatible with the R&R movement. However, this is a fine point and a resistance Bishop should clarify this.

Hi Lonewolf,
Could clarify a few things?
What is YOUR actual allegiance? are you faithful to the resistance? do you go to a resistance Mass as best you can?
Or are you a Thuc line person. Or SSPX?
These kinds of things are important to assess your credibility.
Also Do you accept and fully understand that there are other resistance Bishops besides the ones you named?

Do you also understand that resistance priests operate under supplied jurisdiction and as such only need bishops for holy oils and confirmation? And not for obedience?

I just think it would be nice to know these things about you before you presume to start making unfounded attacks against a priest.
Do you accept that Father is not accountable to some anon on cathinfo?