Sent in by a person who wishes to remain anonymous (though I know the person's first and last name):


For the historical record:

Gregory Taylor claims that resistance to the neo-SSPX in England began with him in 2013. That is a lie.

Organised resistance in England to Menzingen's attempted ralliement with the neo-Modernists in Rome began in 2009 when it was learned that they were attempting to destroy the character of Bishop Williamson and expel him from SSPX.

Cardinal Schönborn, a former Schülerkreis student of the former Cardinal Ratzinger, made it clear on Vatican Radio that Benedict XVI wanted to bring in SSPX, but only without Bishop Williamson. The other three SSPX bishops would be officially acknowledged as bishops and granted jurisdiction, but not Bishop Williamson.

This was made official by the Vatican a few days later, on 4th February 2009, in a "Note from the Secretariat of State concerning the four prelates of the Society of Saint Pius X." This Note stated that: "In order to be admitted to function as a Bishop within the Church, Bishop Williamson must also distance himself in an absolutely unequivocal and public way from his positions regarding the Shoah,which were unknown to the Holy Father at the time of the remission of the excommunication." Everyone knew full well that wasn't going to happen so Bishop Williamson would have to be expelled from SSPX if Menzingen were intent on Ralliement.

This understanding led to close observation of the procedures and statements made by Menzingen in regard to Bishop Williamson, including background checks being made on members of the legal team appointed by Menzingen to defend him. An internal report was issued regarding Maximilian Krah which was subsequently re-written and published on the internet. This exposure then took on a life of its own and came to be known as Krahgate.

At this point we learned through our dear friend Cristera about GREC and Max Barret's long fight against SSPX Ralliement in France.

Gregory Taylor, who moved to the SSPX environment from an Indult background a few years before that was pro-Menzingen during that early period and dismissed the Krahgate revelations as having little to no importance. Until Cristera bought it to the attention of the English-speaking world Taylor was also completely oblivious to the GREC scandal and of Max Barret's resistance even though Taylor had lived in France and speaks fluent French. I bring this observation up merely to indicate Taylor's long service, association and previous interest in the fight for integral Catholicism.

By 2012 he had eventually become hostile to Menzingen and latched on to Fr. Pfeiffer when the latter made an under-the-radar visit to England to meet various people in the Spring of 2013. Although Taylor was taken in hook, line and sinker by Fr. Pfeiffer, and then began his brand of emotionally-driven 'resistance' as he tells in his April 2016 London "Sermon", other laymen in England immediately recognised Fr. Pfeiffer to be a charlatan and Fr. Pfeiffer was, in fact, told to his face by the person who Bishop Fellay accused several times of being 'William of Norwich and 'Dumb Ox'  that he was completely full of shit and couldn't be worked with.

From that moment on Taylor's story of his own brand of emotional 'resistance' in England is his to tell.

Anyone here remember this from 2009?

I created this graphic.

I was 100% against +Fellay's treatment of +Williamson.

Again, don't believe me, just look at my posts from that time period.

Great graphic Matthew.  I remember it well.  I don't know how to get it up here, but back in 2009 when I also came to the bishop's strong defense I sent out a graphic to a lot of people with an image of a happy face with the word "OR" next to it followed by the image of a grenade.  :My subject headline read something like, "When one is at war do you want a ....."

It is a big mistake to associate Bp. W with the UK district. He was hardly here. His years in 'exile' in Wimbledon and now in retirement on the Kent coast is nothing to do with creating a vibrant apostolate and he has since proved to be a great disappointment in this respect to the now fragmented laity. We have to assume that he is constantly weighing his options and dispensing his support in the same old secretive and vacillating  SSPX way. Be prepared for a lot more surprises if he continues to be of some importance.

The active opposition towards Menzingen would have come late here than early. Fr. Morgan was regarded as a hardliner and sympathetic to the movement against an agreement but he again considered his options and chose a neutral position. Which left the principal lay players having to organise away from the Society with the help of priests of similar mind. Bp. W was always making lots of background noise but within the confines of the Society. His resistance is now somewhat reluctant and muted and is more against his old buddies in the Cantons. I too was surprised at the little reaction here to his displacement but it seems he was not that important. To the colonies, maybe.  

It is a big mistake to associate Bp. W with the UK district. He was hardly here. His years in 'exile' in Wimbledon and now in retirement on the Kent coast is nothing to do with creating a vibrant apostolate and he has since proved to be a great disappointment in this respect to the now fragmented laity. We have to assume that he is constantly weighing his options and dispensing his support in the same old secretive and vacillating  SSPX way. Be prepared for a lot more surprises if he continues to be of some importance.

The active opposition towards Menzingen would have come late here than early. Fr. Morgan was regarded as a hardliner and sympathetic to the movement against an agreement but he again considered his options and chose a neutral position. Which left the principal lay players having to organise away from the Society with the help of priests of similar mind. Bp. W was always making lots of background noise but within the confines of the Society. His resistance is now somewhat reluctant and muted and is more against his old buddies in the Cantons. I too was surprised at the little reaction here to his displacement but it seems he was not that important. To the colonies, maybe.  

The colonies are a land of heroes and villains, and both are easily made within this culture, while the Brits might require a bit more proof before they sample the pudding?

The truth I have been told from England from those on the ground is a greatly different story.

The pfeifferite cult (per their website) has not had a Sunday Mass (excepting last Sunday) since before Christmas. They have a 'holy hour' but that attracts about six or seven people, many of whom will have gone to a local SSPX or Motu Proprium Mass beforehand.

They have only one centre in South East London - the other places they mention are about twice a year and never on a Sunday. Is that really what could be called a Mass Centre? They have to include the Masses of Fr King (who wants nothing to do with them and he is in the northern part of Britain) on their site to make it seem that they are active.

Gregory Taylor was a nobody before the SSPX crisis so he will not give up his role easily of Paul the Mexican's right-hand man who states that he is running the Resistance in Europe!!!!!!!!!!!!! That did make the English laugh I was told!!!

Yes, "padding the numbers" is central to Fr. Pfeiffer's modus operandi of late.

Their media outlets list priests that have little-to-nothing to do with Boston, KY.
Their Facebook page description even speaks about +Williamson and +Faure, who they are at war with!
It wouldn't surprise me if they try to "own" extra priests like Fr. King, who actually have no connection to Fr. Pfeiffer and certainly don't approve of Ambrose, Fr. Tetherow, Pablo, etc.

The truth I have been told from England from those on the ground is a greatly different story.

The pfeifferite cult (per their website) has not had a Sunday Mass (excepting last Sunday) since before Christmas. They have a 'holy hour' but that attracts about six or seven people, many of whom will have gone to a local SSPX or Motu Proprium Mass beforehand.

They have only one centre in South East London - the other places they mention are about twice a year and never on a Sunday. Is that really what could be called a Mass Centre? They have to include the Masses of Fr King (who wants nothing to do with them and he is in the northern part of Britain) on their site to make it seem that they are active.

Gregory Taylor was a nobody before the SSPX crisis so he will not give up his role easily of Paul the Mexican's right-hand man who states that he is running the Resistance in Europe!!!!!!!!!!!!! That did make the English laugh I was told!!!

You have to live here to assess the mood correctly. You cannot squeeze events into a contrived plan and ignore those aspects that do not quite fit. That is the stock in trade of a certain bishop! Nor create truth from a Texan desert or an Indian jungle.

Whatever the current allegiances and arrangements of priests and collectives of priests, it is the bums on pews that would seem to matter in the trade. The English tend to be a reserved lot and I believe never completely commit themselves to personalities and positions. In ABL's eyes, the place was never going to be much cop. And they are right to hold back to avoid inevitable disillusionment. The laity are not the property of fickle transient priests. We may use their services and pay for them on the day and that has tended to be the pattern for decades. This is hardly ideal parish life but is the best there is short of going fishing or playing golf.