Fr. Pfeiffer is NOT synonymous with the Resistance in the USA. Thank God!


Just off the top of my head, there are several priests with a Resistance position who have no real involvement with Boston KY. They are working more or less independently in the United States:

Fr. Zendejas - Texas/Connecticut
Fr. Garcia - Texas/Connecticut
Fr. Morel - Louisiana
Fr. Voigt - Syracuse, NY
Fr. Girouard - Canada
Fr. Ringrose - Virginia
Fr. Dardis - ???
Fr. Roberts - Florida


Then you have the slow-motion train wreck, three ring circus that is Boston, KY with:

Fr. Pfeiffer
Fr. Hewko

So now the Boston, KY group has approximately 20% of the American Resistance priests. May this percentage continue to shrink, mostly from growth in the number of Resistant priests!

If you look at the global picture, they're an even smaller sliver. You add Fr. Chazal, but you have to add a TON more Resistance priests, so their overall percentage sinks even lower.

No one man (even Fr. Pfeiffer) should play a super-dominant role in  something as important as the Resistance. What if he fell? What if he made a bad judgement -- say, he allowed an apostate to take over his organization? That would be disastrous.

Some people are sending money to Fr. Pfeiffer on a regular basis, hoping that he will come to their area again soon. Even if he doesn't come for a while, they keep supporting the apostolate.

And the seminary! So many Traditional Catholics rightfully value the priesthood, and are quick to support the formation of new priests. The sentiment is admirable, but people need to realize that a bad seminary is worse than no seminary at all. And while you can have Mass in your living room with minimal equipment without too many ill effects, you can't have a seminary on the same level. There has to be a certain structure, a certain order, and a certain providence of things spiritual, for a seminary to work at all at what it is designed to do: form new priests.

I just hope that everyone keeps in mind that God's grace comes to us through the sacraments. We shouldn't be too picky about where we go to Mass. Even if we don't believe the priest is a saint, that doesn't mean we should leave and find a priest who IS a saint. The grace of Mass and the sacraments comes "ex opere operato". Which means it doesn't depend on the personal holiness of the priest.

If you come across a chapel with a validly ordained priest, trained in a traditional seminary, ordained by a traditionally-consecrated bishop, who says the Tridentine Mass exclusively and opposes Vatican II, modernism, liberalism, feminism, and the neo-SSPX, and a chapel that looks like a Traditional Catholic chapel, you should go to it!

I might be setting myself up for failure here, but I want to be honest.
People in the resistance might not consider Fr. Pfeiffer or Fr. Hewco part of the resistance. However, outside Catholics on the peripheries and within the SSPX do, still, consider these priests as the face of the resistance due to their huge media domination and their very messy departure and Bishop Williamson's previous association with them. If you want into an everyday, average SSPX chapel in Arizona or California and whisper "reistance" everyone has an image of Fr. Pfeiffer and/or Bishop Williamson in their heads. It is probably not the case with Catholics outside the USA but, whether you like it or not, a majority of Catholics who are following the works of the reisitence from the peripheries would still consider the aforementioned two priests as the face of the reistence.  
Now, as someone who follows Cathinfo AND attends an SSPX mass center (who, nonetheless, is very sympathetic with the resistence) knows what's going on in Boston and, of course, do not associate the resistence with these men anymore. However, many people don't care about the resistence enough to do the digging and research.

I'm not very concerned about that because if the person hasn't shown at least a passing interest in keeping up with the SSPX-Resistance situation by this point, they either want the SSPX to make an agreement with Rome or they just don't care. If they care but don't have the time to keep up with the quickly-changing environment we've seen the past few years, they'd at least be open to the idea that their previous impressions may no longer be accurate.

Fr. Pfeiffer is NOT synonymous with the Resistance in the USA. Thank God!


Just off the top of my head, there are several priests with a Resistance position who have no real involvement with Boston KY. They are working more or less independently in the United States:

Fr. Zendejas - Texas/Connecticut
Fr. Garcia - Texas/Connecticut
Fr. Morel - Louisiana
Fr. Voigt - Syracuse, NY
Fr. Girouard - Canada
Fr. Ringrose - Virginia
Fr. Dardis - ???
Fr. Roberts - Florida


FROM PATRICIUS: DON'T FORGET fATHER ORTIZ, WHO IS WORKING IN VIRGINIA WITH fR. RINGROSE. THEN THERE ARE TWO OTHER FORMER SSPX PRIESTS WHO ARE SOMEWHERE IN THE USA, BUT WE DON'T HAVE MUCH INFO ABOUT THEM YET: fR. LIBIETIS AND fR. jAMES DORAN.

For Fr Libietis, a priest told me that he became ermit in the North east part of the US.

I think we can add to this list Fr Paul DaDamio, in Pensylvania, fr Trinchard, Fr Trinh....

Fr dardis is I think in Minnesota, like Fr Voigt....

Darn spell check.  Should have been trying to locate him FOR A long time.  Another thought, would he be a desert father if he were in the South West? HaHaHa. :wink:

Fr dardis heads a parish in Missouri.

Can you give the exact adress of this parish please ?

Matthew, you're familiar with the fallacy known as "No True Scotsman?"

That's kind of what this whole thing amounts to.  When you use a proper noun "The Resistance" people expect (rightfully) to find some tangible, discernible, and evidence based organism.  In other words, they expect to find a group.  A group, at least in the loosest sense, is a collection of persons who report to a similar head and act to achieve a particular goal.

But what is being described is NOT a group.  It's a list of traditional Catholic priests who are not members of the SSPX.  How Fr. Trinchard is mentioned, I have no idea.  He is not only passed recently (RIP) but, to my knowledge, was never involved in "The Resistance" at all.  Maybe I'm wrong about that.  

Anyways, if you just forget about "The Resistance" and focus on "The Catholic Church", things become a lot less confusing.  It's no surprise that people want nothing to do with "The Resistance."  They mention it to someone from Pfeifferville and learn that it is proper only to Pfeifferville.  They mention it on CathInfo and they're given a list of priests who aren't associated with one another in any meaningful, organizational sense and told that this list is "The Resistance."  They mention it in South America and we're not entirely sure what it is, just sure that it has nothing to do with Bishop Williamson. Pretty soon "The Resistance" just becomes the annoying, cliche term by which a particular former-SSPX attendee identifies his "new group."  Whether or not it's actually a group proper.

Decades of loyalty to the SSPX as an organization have left people feeling lost without a named group.  Whether they call it SSPX-MC, The Resistance, SSPX-SO or something else.  Truth is, none of these groups are the Catholic Church.  Focus on belonging to that, the rest will follow (and appear more or less inconsequential).

And I know that no one *said* the SSPX or The Resistance or something else is the Church.  But it's easy to get that impression when these named groups are given so much focus and attention.  And I think the proof is in the pudding, when you see the kind of wounded affect and teetering faith of those who've been exposed to the scandals of particular groups.  It scandalizes them against the faith as such, because they conflate their particular group or their particular priest with the Church itself.