CathInfo.com

I do think there’s also a difference between what we faithful in the pews would like or expect, and what is necessarily possible today. 

People forget that this isn’t the Middle Ages, where religious vows may have had some force of law. In the secular world, being a priest or a religious is treated as essentially a job, choosing to work for a Nonprofit and possibly having some unusual pay or living arrangements. A priest can leave or quit at any time. 

In other words, if a priest goes bad and decides to do something immoral, the superior is obviously going to have to handle the situation as best he can, balancing help for the victim, prevention of further evil, and if possible, help for the priest. If clerics are not being ruthlessly handed over to the secular arm (as it used to be referred to in the Middle Ages when a person was convicted in a church court and then given to the government for sentencing and punishment), it’s probably because the superiors recognize that the guilty priest will not have much shot at repentance and saving their soul in a modern jail. About all that can be reasonably expected is that if crimes were committed and the superior (employer) finds out, he report those crimes to the police. If a priest has done something that’s abhorrent (to a Catholic) but not illegal, most superiors would probably not choose to immediately defrock or expel, because then you lose control of the bad apple. Assuming you are even sure he did it. Better to transfer him somewhere else where hopefully he can’t continue his bad behavior. But that probably means not telling people about your suspicions, except on a need-to-know basis. 

Every “bad priest” is going to be a different case. Is he a serial pederast who has for sure been sɛҳuąƖly abusing prepubescent boys? Is he an otherwise blameless and exemplary priest who has a couple of accusations or insinuations against him? “Investigation” may not be straightforward either. You don’t want to tell people the rumors unnecessarily, nor alert the man under suspicion and give him more cause to hide evidence. Was he caught having an affair with a woman? Or saying inappropriate things to an adult parishioner? All these things would probably require a different course of action. And you could sentence a priest to some kind of no-contact-with-faithful “rehab,” but there’s no guarantee he won’t just quit his order. We should not be surprised that these things are kept pretty secret. It’s not just to “protect the Church’s image.” I imagine there’s very few cases where a superior has absolute proof that a priest is guilty of crimes and can say “Ok, see, we are very transparent and hate sodomy, we caught this one abusing altar boys and now we are handing him over to the cops. Hopefully the state will execute the monster. May God have mercy on his soul.” As satisfying as that would be for everyone. 

Sam, according to the article, the SSPX found The two priests you mention guilty.  Then these two priest who I guess were under some house arrest of some kind, left to join the resistance.  Does the resistance know the back ground and are they still active priests.  I realize this article is a few years old.

I knew nothing about any of this till two days ago.  As I said, if even a tiny bit of this is true, what a sad day for the church.

As I recall, (may not have the dates precisely) but there was a man in the UK by the name of Greg Taylor who first sounded the alarm about the predator priest in the Resistance in the UK, maybe around 2015. Taylor wanted the priest removed from the Resistance Mass circuit where he had access to kids. I believe people tarred and feathered him and called him a liar, much like what is happening here to Voris, and me (by extension) for discussing it. 

I believe that priest lived (and still lives) in Bp. Williamson's house and is his caretaker. 

The priest was mentioned again in April of 2017 in the Swedish docuмentary film about the SSPX abuse coverup. His name is Fr. Stephen Abraham. He was filmed by the crew on the street as he walked into the house. He is mentioned in Michael Voris's initial 45 minute docuмentary from last Wednesday.
It isn't surprising you never heard the story until 2 days ago, because no Catholic news outlet would report the story in 2017, not even Church Militant, if I remember correctly.

The other Resistance priest profiled in the film was in France at Bp. Faure's chapel. In the film, Bp. Faure was filmed gave a poor excuse for the priest at a conference that caused controversy, because he mentioned wanting to save the priest's soul, and it looked like he didn't have concern for the victims. I have no idea if that priest (Fr. Phillipe Peignot) is still with the Resistance. Maybe a French Resistance parishioner will chime in.

That Swedish film is probably still on the internet somewhere.

Many of the other abuse cases that Voris docuмents are ones I had never heard of, i.e. the offender in Veneta, the St. Mary's ѕυιcιdє, the Palmieri father, etc. I was aware of the Sloniker case in Post Falls.

But, you're right - what a sad day for the Church. It will be better after the trash is taken out and the coverups are ended.

 
If so, it sounds like the SSPX found these priests guilty....and then they left to go to the Resistance.  What do you think of these priests being in the Resistance which you say you support?  Were you as adamant about that?

As far as I know, those priests have not been removed from the Resistance. Maybe somebody here knows their current status.