CathInfo.com

A survey of the Instituto Teológico Franciscano (Revista Eclesiástica Brasileira)

    http://revistaeclesiasticabrasileira.itf.edu.br/reb/article/view/87

has asked seminarians. The vaticanist Sandro Magister reported last year in Italian, Spanish, French and English:

    http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2019/05/13/ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs-in-the-seminaries-a-startling-survey-in-brazil/

90% of seminarians of the Church of the new Pentecost in Brazil are sodomites.


Lacking better data, the first guess is that 90% of Novus Ordo clerics generally and everywhere are sodomites. Massive infiltration began (if not earlier) in the mid 1850. There can't be many non-sodomite clerics today.

My current guess with respect to the SSPX wouldn't be 6 or 8 out of 600, but rather like 50% if not well worse.

A survey of the Instituto Teológico Franciscano

  http://revistaeclesiasticabrasileira.itf.edu.br/reb/article/view/87

has asked seminarians. The vaticanist Sandro Magister reported in Italian, Spanish, French and English:

  http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2019/05/13/ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs-in-the-seminaries-a-startling-survey-in-brazil/

90% of seminarians of the Church of the new Pentecost in Brazil are sodomites.


Lacking better data, the first guess is that 90% of Novus Ordo clerics generally and everywhere are sodomites. Massive infiltration began (if not earlier) in the mid 1850. There can't be many non-sodomites clerics today.

My current guess with respect to the SSPX wouldn't be 6 or 8 out of 600, but rather like 50% if not well worse.

I don't believe that to be the case.  I would put the number at somewhere between 10% - 25%.  But, as you point out, it's much lower than the Novus Ordo numbers overall.  So it's absolutely and utterly disingenuous to smear Traditional Catholicism with this.  This criminal activity no more invalidates Tradition than it does the overall claims of the Church as a whole.

Name the names and provide some actual evidence, CM, Voris, Niles, Lamont -- and I assure you that 90% of the SSPX "followers" whom you denounce as a pack of sɛҳuąƖ abusers will be out there with pitchforks and torches demanding they they be brought to justice.  Instead of giving these people the factual information they would need to go after these criminals, they are assailing them with a pack of lies, smears, and insinuations.  In fact, these types of attacks, will have the OPPOSITE effect, to make people believe that this is an assault on Tradition, causing them to "circle the wagons" against the perceived enemy.  You see, CM, Traditional Catholics have not been poisoned by the Novus Ordo mentality that it's "OK to be gαy".  So, no, Voris, you're not OK.  You're a sick individual.  Now, kudos to you if you have managed to contain this illness and shown the fortitude to no longer put your inclinations into practice.  But you're still a sick man and have no business publicly representing conservative Catholicism.  What says that you yourself won't regress and then end up DISCREDITING precisely what you claim to be fighting for?  No, you're in grave danger of relapse and recidivism.  I would not let my children anywhere near you.  Traditional Catholics follow Traditional Catholic teaching that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a disorder against nature, and that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ crimes are heinous (even if consensual).

In other words, the very mentality which MAY have contributed to some of these crimes, Church Militant is actually fanning the flames of with this absurd attacks.  They are consciously making enemies of the people who might be their greatest allies in the fight against the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ perverts.

Lamont goes from there to attack Archbishop Lefebvre for ...

1) preferring quantity over quality (tell that to all the seminarians who have been dismissed from SSPX over the years, some for very light reasons ... from my original class of 21, only 4 went on to be ordained in the SSPX).  My guess is that at least half of all SSPX seminarians are let go.  That would not be the case if this was just about numbers.

2) failing to do a "postmortem" on the Conciliar Church.  Really?  I'd like to see anyone who has done more analysis of what happened to the Conciliar Church than Archbishop Lefebvre did.  This is ridiculous.

3) pretending that pre-V2 seminaries were perfect.  Sure, that's why a lot of the SSPX leadership, including Bishop Williamson, who was one of +Lefebvre's most trusted advisors, constantly railed against "Fifties-ism".  +Williamson traced the woes of the Church back several hundred years to the Renaissance.  This too is stupid and untrue.