I received a note this morning explaining yet another case of faithful clerics suppressed and silence for their Faith in this miserable era of Francis.

***

Frank:

Good morning.

I am writing to report something that hasn’t yet made its way to any publication, but hopefully someone will bring this to light.

In addition to my wife and I being parishioners at the FSSP apostolate here in Minneapolis, we also from time to time attend St. Bede the Venerable, which is a mission parish of The Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter.  While neither my wife nor myself were ever associated with Anglicans or Episcopalians, the Ordinariate Form of the Roman Rite is much more palpable than Novus Ordo masses.  We started attending there about 1.5 years ago.  It is a very small parish; it doesn’t even have its own building and must rent time/space from another Catholic parish.  I’ve been trying to get my Episcopalian friends to attend there in the hope that they will eventually convert.  More particularly, St. Bede’s pastor, Fr. Vaughn Treco, speaks plainly and to the point; much better than most other priests I’ve heard or met.

Last night, my wife and I attended St. Bede’s for mass, but Fr. Treco was not presiding, nor anywhere to be seen.  Instead, a diocesan priest was presiding.  At the end of the mass, the priest made an announcement, indicating that as of yesterday, Fr. Treco had been relieved of his duties as pastor of St. Bede’s, with the diocesan priest being appointed the interim pastor.  We were told that Fr. Treco had been removed because of the sermon he made on The Feast of Christ the King (ordinary time) on November 25 of last year.  This sermon was published by The Remnant Video on YouTube, which can be found here: VATICAN REVOLUTION: Diocesan Priest’s Had Enough

 

VATICAN REVOLUTION: Diocesan Priest’s Had Enough

A Remnant TV ‘Guest Sermon’. In this comprehensive sermon, a diocesan priest–the former Anglican priest…

 

We were told that Fr. Treco was visited by Bp. Lopes, who essentially provided Fr Treco with the option of renouncing what he had said in the sermon (which Fr. Treco declined), or that he be removed as pastor, wherein he would have to take… wait for it…. further education classes so that he could better understand the post-conciliar church. We were also told, though, that Fr. Treco is free to continue as priest for St. Bede, even presiding over mass, just as long as he (a) does not deliver sermons or (b) has his sermons reviewed and signed off by the local diocesan priest prior to any such delievery.

To say the least, the entire parish is shocked.  Suffice it to say, each and every one of them sides with Fr. Treco, and think that this treatment is very underhanded.  Especially considering that this comes the same week that this story broke in Lifesitenews, about a parish not ten minutes away from St. Bedes’s, but one that preaches and shows just the opposite of what Fr. Treco preached about, which is clearly anti-Catholic, but the priest’s job at St. Joan of Arc is very safe indeed.

Thought I’d pass this on to you.

Thanks for all of your work.

Pax Christi,

s/Dustin R. DuFault/

About fgwalkers@att.net

Editor, Canon212.com

23 Thoughts on “‘WHY SHOULD THE HERMENEUTIC OF CONTINUITY BE NECESSARY?’ MINN. ORDINARIATE PASTOR REMOVED BY BISHOP LOPES FOR NOTING INCONSISTENCIES IN VATICAN II, COLLAPSE OF NUCHURCH

  1. Bob Z. on January 21, 2019 at 4:01 pm said:

    What a tragedy. Francis and his evil terrorist minions once again suppress a faithful priest. Is there any doubt that Francis and his henchmen hate the Church and even God?

    Post-conciliar, aka doormat faith.

    • Martyrdom is not a tragedy. This priest was ordered to offer incense to Bergoglian idols, and he refused.
      The hijackers grow more desperate as they approach their death and judgment.

      • Bob Z. on January 21, 2019 at 9:29 pm said:

        The tragedy is that this parish has been denied a priest who speaks the truth. For those Catholics who don’t know any better, they may assume that this priest was in error. However, being a traditional parish they most likely saw through this farce. South American jungle general Francis and his anti-Catholic terror squad must be proud.

  2. Satan himself is in control of the hierarchy with Bergoglio leading the charge. Can’t get any simpler than that.

  3. kiwiinamerica on January 22, 2019 at 10:38 am said:

    It took awhile for the proverbial to hit the fan so I’m thinking that this was not instigated directly by Bp. Lopes. Since the Anglican Ordinariate is yet fragile and likely dependent on the favor of the USCCB, I’m thinking that Bp. Lopes himself was made an offer he couldn’t refuse and told to come down hard on Fr. Treco.
    Failure to drink the Vatican II Kool Aid is seen as treason by AmChurch.

    The priest raised an excellent point. Why should it be even necessary to insist that the Vatican III documents be understood in terms of a “Hermeneutic of Continuity”? This, in itself, indicates that there is a problem with them.

    • Jonathan on January 22, 2019 at 2:18 pm said:

      There were ongoing discussions for several weeks trying to “resolve” this. It absolutely was Bishop Lopes behind this.

  4. https://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/pontifical-commission-ecclesia-dei-suppressed-pope-francis-44060

    After reading this FSSPX letter linked above, and other information like it like your article here, and books like “The Present Crisis of the Holy See *A Warning About Antichrist* (Cardinal Henry Edward Manning); I am coming to new conclusions about the state of the Church; what has happened, is happening.

    This is not acceptable. Not at all. This is systematic, accelerating sacrilegious violations of the Holy Of Holies. This will not end well. I will not participate in it.

  5. Canadian Joe on January 22, 2019 at 12:26 pm said:

    But we are all advised to be as clever as serpents. Father might have known that this would happen.

  6. Jonathan on January 22, 2019 at 2:16 pm said:

    As a parishioner of St. Bede’s who was present and sitting in choir as a server this last Sunday I would like to clarify only one point:

    The priest celebrating Mass and who was appointed parochial administrator pro tempore is not a diocesan priest. It is Msgr. Jeffrey Steenson, Ordinary Emeritus of the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter. He resides here teaching at St. Paul Seminary and as such was available to take this position.

  7. John-Bede Pauley on January 22, 2019 at 3:18 pm said:

    Where is proof for the claim that “every one of [the members of St. Bede’s] sides with Fr. Treco, and think that this treatment is very underhanded.”? I know for a fact that this is false. It is gravely irresponsible to mis-represent matters of such importance, especially where they lead to division and discord.

    • kiwiinamerica on January 22, 2019 at 5:01 pm said:

      Sounds like some of Fr. Treco’s parishioners got the Bishop involved in this. Were you one of them?

    • Dustin R. DuFault on January 22, 2019 at 5:05 pm said:

      John-Bede Pauley: I am the author of the above letter to Frank Walker. I was in attendance at both the mass and the discussion afterwards. I don’t recall a single one of the parishioners in attendance voicing anything other than shock and solidarity with Fr. Treco. If in fact there are parishioners of St. Bede’s who are contra Fr. Treco, then so be it. However, I do not see how that changes anything regarding Fr. Treco’s circumstance; it was not as if the parishioners were consulted prior to the decision to remove him, or that it was put to the parishioners for a vote. In that regard, I fail to see how I’ve misrepresented “matters of such importance” when really the only matter of importance is that Fr. Treco was removed for the sermon he gave on The Feast of Christ the King. If those facts are in dispute, please let me know. Otherwise, I assure you that any ensuing division and discord is as a result of the decision to remove Fr. Treco, and not my reporting thereon.

      • John-Bede Pauley on January 22, 2019 at 11:35 pm said:

        Dustin, you have avoided the question. I do not have a difficulty with you expressing your own disagreement with the decision and regarding the removal of Fr. Treco as “the only matter of importance.” The only question is whether you have reported the situation accurately and honestly. If you can prove that this is the case, please do so. What you reported is that “every one” of the members of St. Bede’s thinks that “this treatment is very underhanded.” Did you ask every member if this is the case? Did you get a response from every member? I assume you want the readers of your blog to trust your reporting.

        • Jonathan Schwartzbauer on January 23, 2019 at 6:42 pm said:

          I am a parishioner who was present. I was serving at the altar for the Mass where this announcement occurred and I was downstairs for our coffee hour where more information was given to us. I was there until the doors were locked talking to people.

          Everyone I talked to, which is the vast majority, is very hurt by this and fully supports Fr. Treco. The only people I did not talk to are non-regulars and 2 who are regulars who spoke up during the subsequent meeting.

          • John-Bede Pauley on January 25, 2019 at 11:38 am said:

            All members of St. Bede’s with whom I have communicated would agree with your statement, Jonathan, that they support Fr. Treco. A number of them, however, would not agree with the earlier claim that “this treatment is very underhanded.” Laity have as much responsibility as do clergy and religious to report facts honestly and accurately.

      • Mary MacArthur on January 23, 2019 at 12:30 pm said:

        Mr. DuFault,
        I advise you not to engage with John-Bede Pauley. I am reasonably certain he is not arguing in good faith. He has a grudge against Fr. Treco and has acted in the past as the very model of a sower of discord.

        • John-Bede Pauley on January 25, 2019 at 10:40 am said:

          Mary,
          You are mistaken on both counts. Please have a care against making defamatory comments. Making un-warranted generalizations and claims based on no evidence is also a concern we should have about some comments in this thread. I do not have a grudge against Fr. Treco. I have always, and still do, wish him and St. Bede’s well. If your assertion that I am a sower of discord is based on the letter I sent you at the time concerns surfaced among the original founders, read it carefully to confirm that I made no accusation against or about Fr. Treco.

  8. Michael Dowd on January 23, 2019 at 4:10 am said:

    Michael Dowd
    Michael Dowd
    1 second ago
    Bravo. This was a desperately needed and St Paul level inspired sermon, speaking truth to power–a power that will slay Fr. Treco at the first opportunity. Such is what happens to those who speak the truth about the devilish creation of Vatican II. Let us pray the folks who listen will take appropriate action and reach the right conclusions. One conclusion is clear. Vatican II was a catastrophe for the Catholic Church and must be abrogated in it’s entirety. The other is less clear: where do we go from here? The only folks now speaking out against Vatican II in the manner of Fr. Treco are the sedvacantists. Check out Most Holy Trinity Seminary: http://mostholytrinityseminary.org/

  9. Nanci Wiggins on January 26, 2019 at 1:21 pm said:

    Those of us under the Oridinariate should be fearful we could be next, if you have a staunchly conservative priest who’s sermons speak the truth. I know of several

  10. freddie stewart on January 26, 2019 at 5:13 pm said:

    I do not concur with every point of Fr. Treco’s criticism of Vatican II. But I do find the thrust of his criticism, that the disastrous state of the Church in the West is the fruit of Vatican II’s overarching spirit of rapprochement with the modern world, to be well-reasoned based on the documented words and deeds of the Council Fathers, Paul VI and post-conciliar Popes, even and incl. my beloved St. JPII.

    That said, we must take care not to throw out babies with the bath water. IMHO, this discernment requires careful and unprejudiced study of the documents of Vatican II, esp. its three Dogmatic Constitutions, in light of pre-Vatican II teaching on related topics.

    May God help us use the current trials as opportunities to purify our faith, strengthen our hope and intensify our love!

Post Navigation