Author Topic: List of priests who are with the Resistance (Read 21268 times)

trento · « **Reply #20 on:** July 14, 2015, 03:18:46 AM »

Quote from: Nadir

Quote from: Against the Heresies
Quote from: LKCTexas
Here is a list of the January 2014 accord to continue the work of Archbishop Lefebvre.

Additional priests at the end of this list that I know were in the Resistance, support the Resistance, at the time of this list or have have joined since.

1. Abbe de Merode (prior, France)
2. Father Koller (prior, France)
3. Father Vignalou (France)
4. Father Hubert de Sainte-Marie Lamb (France)
5. Father Nicolas Pinaud (France)
6. Father Matthew Salenave (France)
7. Father Olivier Rioult (France)
8. Father Pierre-Marie OP and 10 other fathers Avrillé (France)
19. OSB Father Bruno (France)
20. April father, founder of the work of Our Lady of Salérans (France)
21. Father Raffali and community Stellamarins (France)
22. Abbe Picot (Kenya)
23. BISHOP Jean-Michel Faure (South America, Member of Chapter 2012)
24. Father Chazal (Asia)
25. Father Florian Abrahamowicz (Italy)
26. Father Brühwiller (Switzerland)
27. Abbot Martin Fuchs (Austria)
28. Father Girouard (Canada)
29. Father David Hewko (USA)
30. Abbe Pierre-Célestin Ondo Ndong (Gabon)
31. Father Ernesto Cardozo (Brazil)
32. Father Arturo Vargas (Mexico)
33. Father Fernando Altamira (Colombia)
34. Abbot Hugo Ruiz (Mexico)
35. Father Juan Carlos Ortiz (Australia)
36. Father Frank Sauer (Germany)
37. Father Eduardo Suelo (Asia)
38. Father Richard Voigt (USA)
39. Father Arnold Trauner (Austria)
40. Father Trincado (Mexico)
41. Father Valan Rajkunan (Asia)
42. Father Raphael Arizaga OSB (Mexico)
43. Father Thomas Aquinas Ferreira da Costa OSB (Brazil)
44. Father Jahir Brito, FMBV (Brazil)
45. Father Daniel Joaquim Maria Sant'ana, FMBV (Brazil)

Fathers Abrahamowicz, Trauner and Weinzierl (his name is on the list of "paxtecuм111") are sedevacantists; Fr. Sauer is possibly a sedevacantist (he is in contact with Fr. Zaby, a sedevacantist).

Fr. Brühwiler is still with the SSPX with no known intention to join the resistance.

In short: All these names can be deleted from the list. There is just Fr. Fuchs with the resistance.

Does being a sede disqualify a priest who has been a long time resister (as don Abrahamovich has been) from being on this list, which , as far as I can see, has not been defined for purposes of this thread?

I guess as long as the priests are not in communion with Bp Williamson, Frs. Pfeiffer, Hewko, Chazal, etc..then they are not part of the Resistance, because the Resistance rejects sedevacantism.

PapalSupremacy · « **Reply #21 on:** July 14, 2015, 07:35:19 AM »

Quote from: trento

Quote from: Nadir
Quote from: Against the Heresies
Quote from: LKCTexas
Here is a list of the January 2014 accord to continue the work of Archbishop Lefebvre.

Additional priests at the end of this list that I know were in the Resistance, support the Resistance, at the time of this list or have have joined since.

1. Abbe de Merode (prior, France)
2. Father Koller (prior, France)
3. Father Vignalou (France)
4. Father Hubert de Sainte-Marie Lamb (France)
5. Father Nicolas Pinaud (France)
6. Father Matthew Salenave (France)
7. Father Olivier Rioult (France)
8. Father Pierre-Marie OP and 10 other fathers Avrillé (France)
19. OSB Father Bruno (France)
20. April father, founder of the work of Our Lady of Salérans (France)
21. Father Raffali and community Stellamarins (France)
22. Abbe Picot (Kenya)
23. BISHOP Jean-Michel Faure (South America, Member of Chapter 2012)
24. Father Chazal (Asia)
25. Father Florian Abrahamowicz (Italy)
26. Father Brühwiller (Switzerland)
27. Abbot Martin Fuchs (Austria)
28. Father Girouard (Canada)
29. Father David Hewko (USA)
30. Abbe Pierre-Célestin Ondo Ndong (Gabon)
31. Father Ernesto Cardozo (Brazil)
32. Father Arturo Vargas (Mexico)
33. Father Fernando Altamira (Colombia)
34. Abbot Hugo Ruiz (Mexico)
35. Father Juan Carlos Ortiz (Australia)
36. Father Frank Sauer (Germany)
37. Father Eduardo Suelo (Asia)
38. Father Richard Voigt (USA)
39. Father Arnold Trauner (Austria)
40. Father Trincado (Mexico)
41. Father Valan Rajkunan (Asia)
42. Father Raphael Arizaga OSB (Mexico)
43. Father Thomas Aquinas Ferreira da Costa OSB (Brazil)
44. Father Jahir Brito, FMBV (Brazil)
45. Father Daniel Joaquim Maria Sant'ana, FMBV (Brazil)

Fathers Abrahamowicz, Trauner and Weinzierl (his name is on the list of "paxtecuм111") are sedevacantists; Fr. Sauer is possibly a sedevacantist (he is in contact with Fr. Zaby, a sedevacantist).

Fr. Brühwiler is still with the SSPX with no known intention to join the resistance.

In short: All these names can be deleted from the list. There is just Fr. Fuchs with the resistance.

Does being a sede disqualify a priest who has been a long time resister (as don Abrahamovich has been) from being on this list, which , as far as I can see, has not been defined for purposes of this thread?

I guess as long as the priests are not in communion with Bp Williamson, Frs. Pfeiffer, Hewko, Chazal, etc..then they are not part of the Resistance, because the Resistance rejects sedevacantism.

This is ridiculous. All Catholics are in communion with each other, sedeplenist or SV. There is nothing which inherently disqualifies a SV priest from being part of the Resistance, if he wishes.

Thanks to all who tried to provide a comprehensive list. Although it was intended as merely practical, I think this thread has shown once again that a certain level of organization is needed for the Resistance. I applaud the French for establishing the USML. I think it should be expanded to the whole world. I agree with Bp. Williamson that any authority in such an informal and not canonically erected organization would come from the priest members themselves, and that they could take it away if they wanted, but even that is preferable to anarchy and to inter-group conflicts such as the one between Fr. Pfeiffer's and Fr. Zendejas' groups.
Another thing this thread has shown is the attitude towards our SV Catholic brethen. They aren't all Dimond brothers and Fr. Cekadas. If Fr. Iglesias was forced out because he wanted to work together with SVs, then that is a big problem for the Resistance in the US. He was certainly right that SVs are not the enemy, the enemy are the Conciliar destroyers.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #22 on:** July 14, 2015, 08:25:41 AM »

Quote from: Adolphus

Quote from: Centroamerica
Fr. Grosso is not with any of the resistance priests. He is with a group that attacks the resistance as far as I know. The same goes for Fr. Meramo

Fr. Méramo started to resist Bp. Fellay's betrayal long before any of the commonly considered resister priests? Who dare to say Fr. Méramo is not part of the so-called resistance. Who decides who is and who is not part of the so-called resistance?

Even Bp. Williamson had to admit that Fr. Méramo and some others were resisting Bp. Fellay´s betrayal before he and other priests started to do it.

Fr. Méramo was expelled from the SSPX in 2008 or 2009.

Fr. Grosso decided to join the so-called resistance in 2010, and the group you refer to does not attack the resistance, but disagrees in many things with many priests that resisted somehow Bp. Fellay.

So, again, who decides what the resistance is and who belongs to it? Fr. Pfeiffer seems to disagree with Bp. Williamson and Fr. Zendejas. Fr. Meramo and Fr. Ceriani disagree with Bp. Williamson.

That's putting it lightly. This time last year Fr. Ceriani was obsessed with Bishop Williamson in his criticisms. Bishop Williamson could hardly mutter a word in a conference and Fr. Ceriani was writing a new blog entry for Radio whatever. He still reposts a Kyrie Eleison about every month knit-picking every word. Even many of the faithful followers of the blog became nauseated with his constant criticisms of the Bishop. He really, doesn't seem to have anything else to talk about. And in doing this they publicly insult plenty of people calling them the flaccid resistance and a bunch of other terms they made up. That pretty much would say that they are not part of the resistance more so than anything. To top it all off they accuse Bishop Williamson of heresy, being a mason, being an English agent, and a list of other insults. Their purpose for existing is to attack Bishop Williamson. They depend on no bishop, so naturally, they have no seminary and are not gaining vocations in this much needed crisis in the Church and shortage of priests. Granted the complete counter-productiveness of this group (3 priests?), and add that to the fact that Fr. Ceriani was not long ago one of the sharpest anti-sedevacantists, one would be justified in wondering of Ceriani has not been set up as a sort of opposition in Latin America by Menzingen. No doubt Menzingen pays very close attention to this situation. Fr. Ceriani "attacks who would be his friends", and most unnecessarily, since as Papal Supremacy has pointed out, sedevacantists are working together with the resistance. So what is their real beef? They don't have one. Let's not deceive ourselves.

B from A · « **Reply #23 on:** July 14, 2015, 08:33:46 AM »

Quote from: PapalSupremacy

I applaud the French for establishing the USML. I think it should be expanded to the whole world.

I think it was from the beginning. If you look on the Non Possumus website, it mentions the USML, even though the website is out of Latin America. It is international. But of course, a priest has to want to join it.

Quote

I agree with Bp. Williamson that any authority in such an informal and not canonically erected organization would come from the priest members themselves, and that they could take it away if they wanted, but even that is preferable to anarchy and to inter-group conflicts such as the one between Fr. Pfeiffer's and Fr. Zendejas' groups.

But again, the above-mentioned priests would have to want to join it. A recent conference mentioned here seemed to be more or less a USML event, given the presence of +W and the Dominicans. But if certain other priests in the USA do not want to join USML or consider themselves part of it, then somehow it doesn't prevent "conflicts" if you know what I mean.

I could be making a bad assumption that some priests don't consider themselves part of USML or aren't fully in favor of it, but maybe I picked up that impression from the snide comment on a certain website*. If others have info. on the current attitude of [a priest from Boston KY mentioned above - I just realized that CI must automatically change certain terms, which is why the link didn't work, and why something I wrote here didn't] toward the USML, that would be helpful. Nevertheless, I believe the USML is already very much expanded to the whole world, and always was.

*Had to edit my previous post because for some reason the link wasn't working. This is the link (whether it will work correctly once posted here on CI I don't know; it wasn't when embedded):

http://[website of priest mentioned above]/news-from-the-french/

The comment reads:

Quote

News from the French
Posted on 2014/07/16
The French have found a nice comfortable place** from which to engage Satan and his Apostate Angels.

pablo the Amateur Exorcist productions wishes them well in all their endeavors.

**The monastery where the Dominicans of Avrillé have always been is a "nice comfortable place"? :stare:

[Please excuse any confusion in this post; finding out about the auto-correct after posting doesn't leave much time for editing…. ]

Adolphus · « **Reply #24 on:** July 14, 2015, 08:17:23 PM »

Quote from: Centroamerica

Quote from: Adolphus
Quote from: Centroamerica
Fr. Grosso is not with any of the resistance priests. He is with a group that attacks the resistance as far as I know. The same goes for Fr. Meramo

Fr. Méramo started to resist Bp. Fellay's betrayal long before any of the commonly considered resister priests? Who dare to say Fr. Méramo is not part of the so-called resistance. Who decides who is and who is not part of the so-called resistance?

Even Bp. Williamson had to admit that Fr. Méramo and some others were resisting Bp. Fellay´s betrayal before he and other priests started to do it.

Fr. Méramo was expelled from the SSPX in 2008 or 2009.

Fr. Grosso decided to join the so-called resistance in 2010, and the group you refer to does not attack the resistance, but disagrees in many things with many priests that resisted somehow Bp. Fellay.

So, again, who decides what the resistance is and who belongs to it? Fr. Pfeiffer seems to disagree with Bp. Williamson and Fr. Zendejas. Fr. Meramo and Fr. Ceriani disagree with Bp. Williamson.

That's putting it lightly. This time last year Fr. Ceriani was obsessed with Bishop Williamson in his criticisms. Bishop Williamson could hardly mutter a word in a conference and Fr. Ceriani was writing a new blog entry for Radio whatever. He still reposts a Kyrie Eleison about every month knit-picking every word. Even many of the faithful followers of the blog became nauseated with his constant criticisms of the Bishop. He really, doesn't seem to have anything else to talk about. And in doing this they publicly insult plenty of people calling them the flaccid resistance and a bunch of other terms they made up. That pretty much would say that they are not part of the resistance more so than anything. To top it all off they accuse Bishop Williamson of heresy, being a mason, being an English agent, and a list of other insults. Their purpose for existing is to attack Bishop Williamson. They depend on no bishop, so naturally, they have no seminary and are not gaining vocations in this much needed crisis in the Church and shortage of priests. Granted the complete counter-productiveness of this group (3 priests?), and add that to the fact that Fr. Ceriani was not long ago one of the sharpest anti-sedevacantists, one would be justified in wondering of Ceriani has not been set up as a sort of opposition in Latin America by Menzingen. No doubt Menzingen pays very close attention to this situation. Fr. Ceriani "attacks who would be his friends", and most unnecessarily, since as Papal Supremacy has pointed out, sedevacantists are working together with the resistance. So what is their real beef? They don't have one. Let's not deceive ourselves.

You are not telling the truth: Fr. Ceriani was not anti-sedevacantist. But that is not what this thread is about.

Centro, you are missing the point completely. We are not discussing who agrees with Bp. Williamson nor who agrees with you. Frs. Ceriani, Meramo, Turco and Grosso are in the so-called resistance long before 2012. Nobody has expelled them from it, as far as I know (and I would like to know who could do so).