In a very interesting sermon, Fr. David Hewko detonated this hydrogen  bomb:

“I did have a good conversation with Bishop Faure about two months ago now, where he encouraged me, "Go forward. We need a seminary of Archbishop Lefebvre in the United States of tradition and of the counter-revolution." But I said, we're going to need a bishop to take care of these boys and ordain them.

And you can certainly test them. You can see their exams, no problem. And his message was, "I'll talk to Bishop Zendejas." Well, I don't know how that's going to go. But at least Bishop Faure is willing to do something. And he told me this, and I say it happily, maybe he's already said it publicly in French and Spanish, which is where he usually speaks because he lives in France. But he did tell me, "I don't agree with the New Mass miracles [as promoted by Bishop Williamson]. I don't agree with the promoting of the New Mass miracles. And I was wrong," he said, "to go along with that. And I was just going along because to go along," but he said, "I was wrong too." And he was. He was wrong to go along with that. So pray for him that... That's a good sign. And then it's also a good sign that there are prelates preaching the truth.

And Archbishop Viganò is one of them.”

https://thecatacombs.org/showthread.php?tid=5605


Brief commentary forthcoming…

4) Who will staff Fr. Hewko’s seminary?  Will the SAJM and/or Avrille send at least 4-5 more competent priests to teach.

It does not seem likely the Dominicans or SAJM would offer much help to Fr. Hewko, when they bareley have enough help for their own US Seminary (house of study). What seems more likely if Fr. Hewko were to make peace with SAJM, then it would be much more realistic for Fr. Hewko to help out at the SAJM chapels and House of Study rather than SAJM helping Fr. Hewko.


FYI: from Fr. Chazal: MilesChristi-25.pdf (cathinfo.com)
"This is happening as the number of seminarians is surging, here at least with one Indonesian (another gift of the Neo-SSPX), two Nigerians (who are unable to study in Brazil and cannot cross over to the seminaries of Bp. Zendejas in Kansas and of Bp. Ballini in Ireland), and a second Australian in January"

But he did tell me, "I don't agree with the New Mass miracles [as promoted by Bishop Williamson]. I don't agree with the promoting of the New Mass miracles. And I was wrong," he said, "to go along with that. And I was just going along because to go along," but he said, "I was wrong too." And he was. He was wrong to go along with that. So pray for him that... That's a good sign.

I find it an extremely good sign to hear the Bishop say that he might have been wrong about something.  That shows humility, an open mind, seeking the truth rather than clinging to an agenda just to be "right".

So Bishop Zendejas has a seminary in Kansas?  I hadn't heard that before.  Would Father Hewko be competing with him or joining forces?

Well, it’s more a house of spiritual formation, where young men can come to see whether they are able to live by a rule, and pick up a little French along the way.  If so, then at least for the time being, they’d head for the SAJM seminary in France.  But with acreage, a house, and chapel just a mile away, it is certainly the start of a seminary.

As regards whether Fr. Hewko would represent competition or a joining of forces, I guess that depends on all the aforesaid:

If both can accept that there are varieties of charisms to which young men might be called, and heading one way need not be interpreted as a rejection of the other, then there’s no reason that it can’t work out.

Much will depend upon the willingness and ability of both sides to WANT it to happen.  Surely both can admit that perpetual warfare over non-dogmatic matters bears little good fruit.

Why on God's green earth would anyone think Fr Hewko running a seminary would be a good idea? Look at his track record with Fr Pfeiffer and his atrocious lack of judgement. He has never apologised for helping to prop up and keep going Fr Pf's 'seminary' or even mentioned the warlock there running things. Can he see nothing wrong with that set up when he was there? His 'seminary' would be even worse than the Boston, KY outfit with only one priest running it.

Father Hewko has been caught lying again about Bishop Williamson, who no way recommended that anyone go to a Thuc Line Mass and purposely ignored what the Bishop said in the second EC on the supposed apparition. How can anyone like that be trusted EVER?

I cannot see for an instant Bishop Faure supporting a wildcat 'seminary' like this as it would undermine his colleague Bishop Zendejas in the SAJM who has a pre-seminary operating. 

No worries Cebu san.  This is just another vision from an unstable ex SSPX seminarian.

I’ll let +Faure know you consider him unstable (but I doubt he knows who a piss ant like you is).

If both can accept that there are varieties of charisms to which young men might be called ...

This statement here speaks to the problem with nearly all Trad seminaries ... the lack of support for different "charisms".  If a young man felt called to the priesthood, it was basically an SSPX-type system where you went there and became an SSPX priest.  There was a little variety, such as the occasional seminary professor vs. the mission-circuit priest, and some missionary work, but not everyone is cut out for those forms of the priestly ministry.  Even then, it wasn't the priest's choice.  So you had priests being forced out to straw huts in Zimbabwe (and then cracking up, as not everyone is suited for that.)  In the past, if one were more the scholarly type, there were the Dominicans, if more contemplative, other orders, if "ora et labora", the Benedictines, if one felt inclined to teach, there were various teaching orders.  Similarly for female religious, they could help the poor, teach, care for the sick (in hospitals), etc.  This allowed different temperaments.  But there was an almost one-size-fits-all (force fit) vocation among Trads.  Sure, you had a tiny pocket of a Dominican house here, a Benedictine House there, but that's only if your theological perspective was in sync with that group.  Imagine now that you had someone join the Benedictines, and then that Benedictine house suddenly comes to an agreement with Rome (take the Transalpine Redemptorists for instance).  If you can't accept that, what do you do?, leave and go back to living with Mom and Dad in the basement?  This is just a huge mess.  But the worst part is the SSPX forcing different types of things on seminarians.  I was always the contemplative/scholarly type, and a few times at STAS, I expressed out loud that, "too bad there isn't a vocation to be just a seminarian."  I really loved that life there, and wasn't took keen on the idea of hopping from one plane to another on a mission circuit.  But the SSPX would tell you what you were going to do ... whether or not it was a fit for your temperament.  Don't get me wrong, every priest should be zealous for helping souls, but maybe spending half your week at an airport would wear on some individuals and lead to mental, emotional, psychological, and spiritual breakdowns over the long term.  I would have enjoyed being a seminary professor, for instance, but that certainly would not have been left to my choice, and given that I occasionally disagreed with the SSPX even back then, there would have been zero chance of that happening.