Despite the suggestion in this SSPX article announcing the use of a conciliar retreat house because it would not be fitting to have women at the Brothers’ novitiate, I am wondering why this never impeded the SSPX from hosting women’s retreats in Winona before, when segregation seemed to pose no particular difficulties.

Could it be that the SSPX in Minnesota is finding a convenient pretext for satisfying Menzingen’s order to collaborate with its heretical conciliar colleagues?

https://sspx.org/en/news-events/calendar/womens-ignatian-retreat-christ-king-retreat-center-buffalo-mn-august-47492

Surely the proof of this is the contradiction presented by another SSPX announcement inviting all to camp at the Winona novitiate to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the seminary building:

https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/holy-angels-novitiate-host-celebration-stockton-hills-70th-jubilee-47586

How can the former not be befitting a house of prayer, but the much more intrusive camping invitation of hundreds present no such problems?

The top link shows the retreat details, but I don’t see the article you are talking about in your first paragraph and the bottom link does not mention it either.

Here you go:

https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/mens-ignatian-vocations-retreats-holy-angels-novitiate-womens-buffalo-mn-47435

Thanks for the notice.

Note also that this article speaks of “women’s retreats” (ie., plural), implying that the SSPX will be using this conciliar venue as an ongoing venue in the future.

Interesting since it seems to coincide with what’s happening in Syracuse, NY. I generally like to give the benefit of the doubt to things of this nature, but this is rather poignant ......

The SSPX Church in Syracuse (Warners), NY has been engaging in some unusual activity. They have ‘borrowed’, from the NO “diocese” of Syracuse the use of the conciliar Church of Saint Cecilia in nearby Solvay, NY. The first known use occurred on Sunday, May 5th for the high mass. Here is a link to the bulletin:http://www.bvmacademy.org/bulletin/2019-05-May.pdf

Make no mistake, this is a beautiful church, who wouldn’t want to go to mass here? To be fair, there is talk that the SSPX may purchase the church in the future. In times past, the SSPX couldn’t buy conciliar property without a secret proxy buyer. If they are to purchase the property, why would the NO church be willing to sell it to the SSPX if they aren’t viewed as members of their church?


After they sold the large church in Syracuse several months ago and moved all Sunday masses to the smaller chapel at the school in Warners, room to accommodate all of the faithful has been difficult. They have increased the number of masses and in the past they sometimes used the gymnasium as a temporary church to fit everyone for larger groupings, but for some reason this is no longer an acceptable option. I will grant that the church that was sold was in a fairly bad neighborhood, but during the day it was not too terribly bad.



I know that at least one funeral is scheduled to be held at Saint Cecilia’s and I believe that weddings are to be held there also.

Questions:
1) Why is the NO church and the liberal Syracuse “diocese” being so accommodating to the SSPX?
2) Why not use the school gymnasium, which was a perfectly acceptable option before this “deal” was made?
3) If room was going to be such a problem, why did they sell the church?

The SSPX is actively seeking (and creating) opportunities to collaborate with the conciliarists.

The SSPX is actively seeking (and creating) opportunities to collaborate with the conciliarists.

Agreed, and the conciliar church is doing doing the same with the SSPX.

They only held womens' retreats at Winona when the seminarians were away on breaks ... Christmas, Easter, and Summer breaks.

Good point, but didn’t they hold them at the SSPX venue in the past?

I want to clarify and add:

When the women stayed in the Seminary rooms for retreats, the skeleton crew wasn't just on a different floor; we actually moved to a different building ("the Convent") next door.

The women had the entire 2nd and 3rd floors. The first floor was much higher traffic, where the chapel, refectory, and office rooms were. The secretary worked in one of these offices. The priests lived in their own self-contained rooms close to these locations. In other words, their bedroom, bathroom, and office were all connected so they never had to emerge. But note that the first floor was considered a "public area" not part of the cloister. If your family visited you for any reason, the 1st floor is as far as they could go.

Also keep in mind that priests have to be trusted to some degree. Wherever they go, they are alone with penitents and those seeking spiritual direction -- both male and female. But generally speaking priests can handle it -- they have to handle it. If you can't trust the priests, it's time to throw in the towel. It's seminarians you have to be extra careful with. They are statistically younger and (all things being equal) have less virtue. That's why the seminarians were sent out to a separate building whenever women "took over" the cloistered 2nd and 3rd floors. It is always good to be pessimistic when it comes to testing one's virtue. Better be safe than sorry.

The cloistered area was either men or women -- never both.

Hah, I never got a break from the weekly chores.  Even after I had tested out of Latin, they had me working in the Library instead ... and then later I taught a Latin I class.  My first year was the first year at Winona, after they had relocated from CT, and there was no actual Library.  I put together their entire collection, having gone through and sorted untold numbers of boxes filled with books.  I even created the so-called "Hell Room" annex, a small locked room into which we exiled Modernist and heretical trash ... to be accessed only by permission of one's spiritual director.  I actually enjoyed the work and found it relaxing.