The only traditional priests I avoid are:
1. Those who make it clear that they will deny communion to Catholics for spurious reasons (e.g., Some SSPV priests deny communion to Catholics who usually attend a Thuc-line priest) and priests who claim to be the last bastion of Catholicism (i.e., cults).
2. Those who will not tell questioners who ordained them.
3. Those who were not ordained in the traditional rite by a bishop whose lineage does not include a Novus Ordo consecration, i.e., the priest must be clearly validly ordained.
4. Priests in "full communion" with Modernist Rome. I know that "full communion" is a ridiculous term, but I don't know how else to describe the Recognize and Resist folks who are not in "full communion" as they claim to be in communion with Rome while, at the same time, they reserve the right to disregard Rome any time they decide Rome is wrong about something or other. Thus, I will not reject a priest who says the so-called "una cuм Mass" but I don't understand them.
5. Priests who preach clear heresy that any person familiar with the Baltimore Catechism No. 1 should know is heresy. Obviously, this is something that I wouldn't know until after the fact and would avoid the priest in the future.
Frankly, I haven't found a reason to avoid any particular traditional priest when traveling and don't consider that I am avoiding a priest when I have multiple options at a particular location and choose one over another.
It seems to me that my criteria specifically requires me to attend "controversial" priests.
Topic: Would you rather avoid controversial priests? (Read 8309 times)