Skip to main content

SSPX and Fr. McLucas

Image
By
+
JMJ


So Church Militant is at it again - trolling the trads with an article that prove that the SSPX is "sheltering predators".
Image result for two way street

So let's look a the fundamental claim made by CM via their free-lancer:
Indulgence [shown by Rome] now being shown towards the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) by Church authorities can allow priests suspended from ministry on account of sexual immorality to function under the cover of quasi-legitimacy should they choose to associate themselves with the renegade organization. ... This is not just a theoretical possibility. It is already happening in the case of Fr. James McLucas.
So the first question is ... what is the crime of Fr. McLucas?  Ultimately, he was accused of sexual and physical abuse. Now there are two things to consider here (beyond the Fr. Perrone vs Fr. McLucas parallels):
  1. This single accusation was settled out of court. Meaning while we know the accusations, we don't know if it is true. 
  2. The lady involved was over the age of consent. To be specific in her 20's.
 So ... even if true, the accusation that Fr. McLucas is a predator is way off the mark and Fr. McLucas is, at worst, a priest who fell into a 'natual' sin, and that is unproved.

Again, this is simply a case of Baresel trolling the trads. 

So the next question ... is the SSPX sheltering him?  In other words, does he live with them for a long period of time. Is he a member of the SSPX?  Along these lines Baresel makes the accusation that:
Suspended from his priestly functions by the archdiocese of New York, McLucas turned to the SSPX, with which he was working by October 2016. ... SSPX priest Nicholas Stamos informed me by phone on July 18 that McLucas is still participating in the organization's work.
It would have been nice if Baresel had dug a little deeper to see the depth of the relationship between Fr. McLucas and the SSPX. Saying that Fr. McLucas works with the SSPX is far different than occasionally helping.

Fundamentally, Fr. McLucas isn't a member of the SSPX, he only visits periodically.  Baresel's piece is simply sloppy click bait that implies much and proves nothing.


So what are they trying to do? 

Simply two-way guilt by association:
  1. SSPX is guilty for associating with Fr. McLucas,
  2. Fr. McLucas is guilty for associating with the SSPX.
For a change, I have included links to CM's articles as an example of trolling, half-truths and inuendoes.

I have also included a link to Connecticut Catholic Corner for a sanity check from a non-SSPXer who asks all the right questions!



P^3


 

Links





 
 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Rome and SSPX - Version 2026 Part 2

By
 + JMJ Part 2 Detailed Synopsis and Timeline (ChatGPT) At this point, I took the shortcut of uploading all of my previous links and the latest SSPX and Rome links to ChatGPT. This way we’ll see how ChatGPT interprets the world as presented on the internet. P^3 Briefing Memo Subject: Rome–SSPX Relations and Planned Episcopal Consecrations (July 1, 2026) Prepared for: Ecclesial / Academic / Media Briefing Date: February 2026 Issue Overview The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has announced its intention to consecrate new bishops on July 1, 2026 , potentially without a papal mandate . The Holy See has acknowledged ongoing talks with the SSPX and stated its desire to avoid rupture, but has not granted approval nor outlined canonical consequences. The situation revives unresolved tensions dating to 1988 and raises questions about schism, authority, and doctrinal continuity. Background Founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX seeks to preserve pre-Vat...
Post a Comment
Read more

Schism

By
There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX / DICI: Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure.

By
+ JMJ The following is the communiqué of the SSPX regarding the Bishop Williamson's consecration of Fr. Faure. As a follow-up to this article ,  I would like to highlight the rationale for denouncing the consecration. Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure. On March 19, 2015, Bishop Richard Williamson performed the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure at the Benedictine Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, Brazil. Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure have not been members of the Society of St. Pius X since 2012 and 2014, respectively, because of their violent criticisms of any relations with the Roman authorities. According to them, such contacts were incompatible with the apostolic work of Archbishop Lefebvre.(1) The Society of St. Pius X regrets sincerely that this spirit of opposition has led to an episcopal consecration. In 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre had c...
Post a Comment
Read more

Bishop Huonder, SSPX in Schism? - Nope, Consecration of Holy Oils - Update 1

By
 + JMJ  So Bishop Huonder is in the news for two reasons.  First, his 'Testimony' concerning Pope Francis etc. This was received as a nice reinforcement by Trads (SSPX and others).  Of course, there are those that now are demanding an apostolic investigation.  Yawn, been here before.  This was predictable as other bishops who have followed the same path came to the same conclusions.  It is the way. Second, he celebrated the Chrism Mass and blessed the Holy Oils for use in the SSPX's European chapels and ceremonies.  This caused a stir amongst some Trads who are locked in one or the other statements made by either Archbishop Lefebvre or others. I received two versions of a question regarding this event: Hi Tradical Do you have any comments about doubtful oils in SSPX europe by +Huonder (NO Bishop not conditionally consecrated)? God Bless Hi Tradical Any thoughts on Huonder oil, not conditionally ordained and consecrated by SSPX bishops? God Bless M...
Post a Comment
Read more