CathInfo.com

Certainly, I agree that not all are.  But some are and they are assuredly masculine in overall appearance and diligent about their physical shape.

But the main point I would like to again emphasize is that one should ignore the statement that Fullerton was ever alleged or much less charged with physically assaulting anyone.

I wrote that post very early this morning to respond to the question about 'whatever happened to the members of the SSJ?'  Since Daniel Fullerton was not mentioned, I merely wished to indicate that he did remain with the SSJ to its end in the Scranton diocese and that he still has an ecclesial role.

So, let me reiterate that the Moderator was requested many hours ago, (in fact, almost immediately after I posted that initial statement) to remove it in its entirety so that I might revise it.

Unfortunately, being new to the site I did not realize that one is offered only a 'Preview' of postings but NO edit function for a brief period after writing a post, something which is rather common on other sites.

Regardless, I would ask you as a point of honor to consider what I have said, along with what I have retracted.  The central point was to merely indicate that one prominent member of the SSJ who had been unmentioned was still around.

Thank you.

Yes, in all the proceedings, the only things alleged of Father Fullerton were --

1) one second-hand statement that he had no problem with the boys skinnydipping at some camp run by Urrutigoity.

and

2) "cussing out" someone who had certain accusations against Father Urrutigoity

With everything going on, I'm guessing it would have come out if he had been an actual participant in such activity.  Urrutigoity was well known for snookering and manipulating people.  He could have had him fooled, much like he fooled Bishop Williamson, into thinking that the poor guy was just being unjustly persecuted.  Until something comes out, only God knows.

Interesting story.  Just before Father Urrutigoity's last year at seminary, I left STAS to become a sedevacantist.  Bishop Williamson had me corresponding with Father Urrutigoity, as the latter sought to win me back.  Father U had sought to induct me into his click, but I didn't want to have anything to do with them.  He took an interest in winning me back after I left.  So we exchanged some theological letters.  I went to his ordination the following June, and he told me that he had offered his first Mass for me.  Later someone told me that he told him the same thing, that he had offered his first Mass for someone else.  He knew what to say to try winning people over.

Father U was a liturgical experimenter.  He tried to introduce "troped" Kyries into the Mass ... even though these had been banned after the Council of Trent.  At one point he wanted women in the seminary choir area to sing.  I objected to the powers that be, and Father U was overruled.  I don't think he liked my interference.

I searched the sessions of the council of Trent and cannot find anything about this.

I am aware there was something from around that time (not sure if specifically from the council) requiring the Gloria be said as written, which stopped a trope to our Lady that added some lines to the Gloria.

That was in one of those committees that spun off as a result of Trent ... like the one that gave us the Roman Catechism.