Priest Rejects V2, Leaves Rockford Diocese: Interview
#1
Below is an interview by Dr. Thomas Droleskey with Fr. Michael Oswalt, who was ordained in the Rockford Diocese last May. He concluded that Vatican II wasn't Catholic, contacted us, and left. He will be entering Most Holy Trinity Seminary this fall.

He visited us in Florida and Ohio recently. His is a really interesting story.

The stories he told about the Novus Ordo seminary were like a trip in the time machine for us all. They're still teaching the same modernist garbage and persecuting anyone who aspires to be a real Catholic priest, just as they were forty years ago.

Anyone interested in his exchange of letters with the diocese can find it on Tom Droeleskey's Christ or Chaos site, which (of course) comes with a giant flashing sede warning sign.

Please keep him in your prayers.

---------------------

Q. Father Oswalt, could you provide readers with some information as to your background. That is, where and when were you born? Where did you grow up? What did you learn in conciliar schools and/or religious education programs? Did you ever question what was being taught to you in your youth? What was your impression of the Novus Ordo as were growing up?

A. I was born July 7, 1972 in a small Midwestern town of Dixon, Illinois as the youngest of 6; 5 boys and 1 girl.

My oldest brother is 55 and my closest brother is 44. My sister is in the middle – well protected while growing up, I might add.

I went to the local Catholic grade school for 8 years, where there were still a couple of nuns teaching in the school at the time, not in habits, of course, but usually in pantsuits with a religious pin on their lapel which did nothing for the stimulation of any sort of vocations for the young ladies. There was a religion class that we took on a daily basis in every grade as well as CCD classes which I continued through high school.

The lay teachers at the school were good, hardworking teachers, of which we were taught well in secular studies, but as is the norm in the 70’s and 80’s I really was not taught the Catholic Faith. I only remember, in essence of course, being taught that God loves me, draw a picture of God, and things like that. No Baltimore Catechism there!

As our family was on the poorer side, and still is, I then attended the city public high school as it was much cheaper than the Catholic high school in the next town. Throughout my religious education training in grade school and high school I never questioned anything I was taught because, like I mentioned, I really wasn’t taught anything of substance. How can you question that God loves you?! I was born into the Novus Ordo and that was all that I ever knew, so even if I thought something may be wrong, I knew nothing else. Although I remember a lot of craziness in the liturgies, etc. I nevertheless, had an innate conservatism that kept me from participating and laid the seeds for my questioning things as I got older.

Q. What did you do, Father Oswalt, prior to entering the seminary to study for the conciliar priesthood? That is, where did you go to college? What did you do after you graduated from college? What led you to study for the conciliar priesthood as a "late" or a "delayed" vocation?

A.. I graduated from North Central College in Naperville, Illinois in 1995 with a degree in Business Management. I very easily could have gotten a job in Chicago or surrounding suburbs and worked my way up in a company but my father was just diagnosed with cancer and the prognosis was that he was only to live another 2 years, so I moved back home to help my mother take care of him and got a job working for Hormel foods as a 2nd shift supervisor for the hot dog department (eat beef hot dogs, stay away from the chicken and pork hot dogs) in a town near Dixon. I worked there for about 2 years and an opportunity came for me to work for Northwestern Mutual Insurance Company of which I took and sold insurance for about a year or so.

I wasn’t very successful because I did everything I could to help those I talked to but when it came time to ask for money to buy the policies, I couldn’t do that very well as I knew money was usually very tight for those I talked to. I then got a job for a local eye doctor in town to be a sort of jack of all trades, working in the tech area, the business area, etc. It was there that the pastor of my parish asked me while in for an appointment put the question to me of if I was married yet and when I said “not yet”, he asked me if I ever thought of the priesthood. I had very much so when I was an altar boy in grade school but when high school and college rolled around I succumbed to the trappings of the world and with me being somewhat of a sports star (baseball - of which I received scholarships) there were many more temptations that presented themselves. But the question stuck and I could not shake it, so after about a year or so of continual prayer, research, discernment, etc. I made the leap and contacted the diocesan vocation director.

Q. Can you describe the admissions process in the Diocese of Rockford? That is, was there a psychological screening? Were members of the laity involved in the interviewing process? Were any possible "problem areas" pointed out to you prior to your being accepted? Was your acceptance granted to you on a conditional or unconditional basis? That is, were you deemed "suspect" of being "rigid" or in need of being "monitored" to determine if you were too "conservative" for ordination.

A. The admissions process was somewhat involved in that they tested you for just about everything. The Diocese of Rockford has a reputation as being one of the more conservative dioceses, so in their eyes a conservative bent is not something of a red flag. There was quite an extensive psychological test given of which I passed as being normal and on the conservative side. I was vetted by the vocation department mostly and I was granted acceptance by the bishop unconditionally. At that time I still had not much of an idea as to the different strata within the conciliar church as to liberal, conservative, traditional, etc. It wouldn’t come until my second year at seminary when the red flags were being thrown about me as being too rigid by the seminary and I was being monitored by the seminary because of my trying to be faithful to all the traditions of the Church.

Q. What seminary did your attend? What did you think of its program? Were there any professors who went beyond the approved apostasies of conciliarism to place into question articles contained in the Deposit of Faith (the historicity of Scripture, the historicity of the Resurrection, the nature of the miracles performed by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the Perpetual Virginity of Our Lady)? Was there any hint of heterodoxy in your moral theology courses (fundamental option, proportionalism, use of an "informed" conscience" to use contraceptive pills and devices)? Any problems in your Christology or sacramental theology courses?

A. I attended Mundelein Seminary in Chicago. I had no clue as to the reputation of the seminary, or any other for that matter, and I was given the choice, thanks to the diocese’s kindness, of where to go to seminary.

As my father, as I mentioned before, was still very sick at this point, I wanted to stay close as possible to home to help out when I could. Mundelein was the closest that we sent our guys. At first, all being very new to me, it was good in the first year. I had no other reference to compare to other than secular college, but as time went on, the comparisons were very close to a secular college in the structure and freedom given as well as the overall atmosphere of the seminary, which seemed odd to me, but I didn’t know any better.

There were a few stellar professors at the seminary but after the initial few years are under your belt and you start to comprehend the basic philosophical and theological principles you started to pick up on the inconsistencies being taught, even from instructor to instructor.

We started to before every class put on our “heresy filters”, the things that somehow didn’t seem right some of us would go back and do research by looking at pre-Vatican II theology books, manuals, encyclicals, etc. There was even times when there would be a direct contradiction taught even to the new catechism of John Paul II. There were many instances of things taught that weren’t right, like one instructor telling us that we don’t have to assent to every doctrine of the Catholic Church, or another instructor telling us that the Church really began at Vatican II.

After awhile you knew who were the instructors were who you could at least put some trust in and the others who you just had to suffer through the class to get it out of the way. There seemed to be a heavy emphasis on psychology and on being “pastoral” of which I still don’t understand what was meant by that in their eyes other than being all-inclusive and not hurting anyone’s feelings. It was often that some of the theologians or resources studied were Protestants.

With some of the instructors things like Liberation Theology were still being taught or emphasized. Although a lot of the times things were not taught formally in class, but when you talked to the professors outside of class, like eating at the refectory, you saw some of their beliefs – married and woman priests, homosexuality as being acceptable, erroneous morality on issues like contraception, abortion, etc. Sometimes it would seep into the formal classes, like in Morals on how we should leave people in ignorance if they are contracepting or whatever to avoid problems with their conscience.

Of course, we had our classes on Ecumenism and how great it is, where we were required to attend a Protestant service and write of our impressions as well as a non-Christian worship like the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, whatever and write of our experience. There were also the perennial musings of liberalism by nearly all the professors – like in Christology pondering the question of whether or not our Blessed Lord knew He was God (they would say not), the sort of things that when you look at say, the Baltimore Catechism, those clear answers were often debated in classes or spun using the eyes of Vatican II – especially in areas like ecclesiology, Christology, and Liturgy.


Q. What were you taught about the Sacred Liturgy in the seminary? That is, were you given any history in the development of the Mass of the Roman Rite in the first centuries of the Church? What were you taught about the Novus Ordo (did the matter of its compatibility with the true Mass of the Roman Rite ever come up)? Were the conciliar "efforts" to end "abuses in the Novus Ordo mentioned (Dominicae Cenae, Inaestimabile Donum, Liturgiam Authenticam, etc.). What were you taught about the General Instruction to the Roman Missal?

A. In terms of Sacred Liturgy, we were taught all in the context of the Novus Ordo. We did look at the historical development of the Mass but the thrust of learning came from Vatican II and post Vatican II documents and theological works, especially Sacrosanctum Concilium and the General Instruction to the Roman Missal. There really was no comparison of the True Mass with that of the New Mass. In fact, we never really mentioned the Latin Mass, other than in a historical footnote. Everything about the first 1,962 years of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass was somehow proven how the New Mass is the same and explained always within the context of the New Mass. There was mention here and there of some of the abuses but we did have a pretty good Liturgy instructor who insisted on following the rubrics as is and in a most conservative way of “reading the black and doing the red” only. But with the New Mass it doesn’t matter as anything goes.

Q. Was there a "pastoral year" involved in your seminary formation? If so, where did you spend the year? What did you think of it at the time?

A. I did take a pastoral year in that at the very beginning right before I left for my first year in seminary my father passed away so I stayed at home with my mother to help her half the week and the other half I worked in my local parish. It was there I started to see behind the scenes, of how in praxis the Catholic faith was being conveyed in all the different programs and “ministries” and practiced by the people.

Q. What personal experiences in your pastoral life as a conciliar priest after your "ordination" led you to question the nature of conciliarism? Could you describe any one or two episodes that stand out in your mind concerning the extent of the apostasy--both theoretical and as a matter of pastoral praxis--that you encountered during your pastoral work?

A. There were so many things that continued to gnaw at me upon being in the thick of things in the parish.

In general, things like how there were so many “ministries” were being run by the laity and how the role of the priest has been so stripped of its proper meaning that the people in the “ministries” (albeit most were in good faith) looked upon their duties as equal to that of the priest.

There were many meetings that we would have as a presbyterate, especially the junior clergy, where it was reinforced of looking at the priesthood as a “career” or a job.

One instance comes to mind in one of our junior clergy meetings where some of us younger clergy were apt to wear cassocks, traditional vestments and other external traditional practices as well as some of us said the Traditional Latin Mass in the parish and there were apparently many complaints coming into the chancery about us and our traditional practices. So the vicar for clergy gave us quite a tongue lashing on how we shouldn’t be doing or wearing these traditional things, at one point he even yelled at us for having too much lace on our albs. We were accused of “playing dress up” and we were sending the wrong signals to the people.

But then he said something that really stuck in my throat when he told us that by doing these things we would be damaging “our careers” and the possibility of advancing, especially of being made pastors, etc. That did not sit well at all and really ignited in me that terrible feeling that something is very wrong with the conciliar church, something that intellectually I studied and began to understand but it didn’t take on flesh until I began to see things from the other side of the table that as an everyday man in the pew I never saw.

But for me, the real crux of the problem came in the saying of the New Mass and just realizing that no matter how reverent I may be, no matter how beautiful the vestments were, it was Protestant – from top to bottom. Normally, I would always keep my eyes lowered during the service and not glance up to look at the people, only during the sermon, but I remember one time standing at the “table” and I looked up and I got the unmistakable feeling that I was an entertainer, an actor on a stage and that the whole service was aimed at pleasing each other and it was like I was just a storyteller as I read off the prayers to the people. Needless to say, I never looked up again.

Q. Please describe the study that you undertook privately that led you to question your priestly orders and the legitimacy of the conciliar religion.

A. From about the second year of seminary I began to try and build up my personal library, so I would go to used book sales and pick up many pre-Vatican II books that people were getting rid of, and of course having Tan Publishing in the Rockford diocese I would get a lot of their books, so I would read and study a lot of those older books, the books that were not infected with Modernism.

I also began to read the older encyclicals of the Popes prior to Vatican II and, obviously, when one reads the encyclicals of a Pius IX, Pius X and so forth you begin to see the things that they were saying is the exact opposite of what is being taught today. The condemned propositions of the Catholic Church for millennia are now all of a sudden being forgotten and the opposite is being taught.

I had planned on getting an advanced degree in theology in seminary so I began to look at a possible thesis and I thought a good one would be looking at the polemics within the Church and the theological basis for the “left” and the “right” understanding of the Faith. So I would occasionally do research of all the liberal writings and groups as well as the conservative writings and groups. It was there that I began to compare all the pre-Vatican writings and theology, you know what has always been taught from the beginning, with that of the new theology.

Besides the formal books and theologians I would read from many of the Traditional writings of the Catholic Resistance today – the Ottoviani Intervention, books and articles by Fr. Wathan, Fr. Trinchard, Fr. Cekada, Bishop Sanborn, Bishop Dolan, Bishop Pivaranus, Dr. Droleskey and a host of other publications like The Remnant, Catholic Family News, The Four Marks, The Angelus, The Reign of Mary, etc. and many traditional websites all from a wide spectrum of neo-conservatives to the “recognize and resist” to sedevacantists. It was looking at the preponderance of evidence given and the comparison thereof that I began to see the truth little by little.

Q. When did your pastor and your conciliar bishop suspect that you were entertaining doubts about your priestly orders and the validity of the Novus Ordo service? Were you questioned by them? How did you respond to their questioning?

A. I became suspect by the pastor because of the external things I had – simple things like I would wear my cassock a lot, my vestments were the old Roman fiddle backs, when I would go bless a building or something I would wear my biretta and cope – these external manifestations led the pastor to put a critical eye on me.

It escalated dramatically when I would preach, because I rejected the storytelling, feel good preaching in favor of the traditional preaching, preaching the hard truths and not watering them down which some people would send letters to the pastor complaining about that. All this began to give the impression that I was “attached to the past” or had a “pre-occupation with tradition”.

What really sent the pastor over the brink was that I said the Traditional Latin Mass and that I would get people coming to that when I said it privately and many others were finding out that I said it and were becoming interested.

The final straw came when one of the secretaries looked at the history of websites on the computer and saw a lot of the traditional websites I read. I did not have internet access in my room so I would use the computer in the office to do my research – so I would read and visit websites like Christ or Chaos, the Daily Catholic, Tradition in Action, Novus Ordo Watch, etc. As I mentioned, my plan was to continue to prepare for writing my thesis and I needed to read as much as I could from both the right and the left. But she flew off the handle when she saw these websites and printed it out for the pastor who in turn contacted the vicar for clergy and the bishop who then the very next day called me in immediately for a meeting.

I was brought into the bishop’s office with the vicar for clergy and he began to question me in regards to my beliefs.

I found out that the pastor was continually calling the vicar and, in essence, complaining about me because of my vestments, sermons, etc. so there was a general feeling that I was questioning the post conciliar church. I was quite taken aback, not to mention a little scared, as I did not know what this was about until the bishop asked a few questions like, “Are you questioning and doubting your ordination and the validity of the Mass”. I answered “no” because it was at that point, being confronted like that, through all those years of research and prayer, I had in that instant certainty the falsity of the Novus Ordo. So when I said “no” I did not elaborate as, in essence, I was saying no I am not questioning the validity anymore because it is false. To my shame, I should have said that right there but I knew, from hearing of cases before, they would have forced me to see a psychiatrist and/or a “priest” to “re-educate me”. In my weakness and sinfulness I needed some time to plan what this means and how I would proceed.

After that I had to meet with the pastor and he was blunter in the questions, like “do you believe what is on those websites, etc.” I was fairly vague in my answers stating that I was doing research, which I was, and trying not to incriminate me just yet, again to my shame. I finally got a little perturbed with the silly questions like, “do you pray the Luminous mysteries of the Rosary” that I just said “Look, I am trying to be a loyal son of the Church, what is with all the questions”. And then the pastor said something that was the icing on the cake, something that he didn’t mean as so serious, but he answered, “Which Church are you trying to be the son of, the pre-Vatican II Church or the post-Vatican II Church?” And then it hit me like a ton of bricks, there are two Churches, one that our Blessed Lord gave to us, the True Catholic Church for almost 2000 years and a new church, a new religion that sprung up after Vatican II, not from our Lord. Inadvertently, the pastor helped to bring things to light.

Q. When did you conclude with moral certainty that you were not a true priest and that the conciliar religion was false? What steps did you take after you had reached that conclusion? What role did Our Lady play in your deliberations?

A. So now I had come to the conclusion in my conscience of the sad state of affairs the Church was in and of myself involved in a false religion, no less “ordained” into it. I had reached out prior to this to some people for help as to what I can do, primarily before I was looking to be conditionally ordained somehow and maybe remain within the conciliar structure, as I was not fully convinced of it being a false religion. But now there was no question, so I was in contact with Fr. Paul Trinchard at first, then through Michael Cain of the Daily Catholic with the CMRI priests and finally through Dr. Droleskey with Bishop Sanborn, Bishop Dolan and Fr. Cekada. Through many e-mails I started to try and get a feel of what I can do, primarily I wanted to know how to leave the conciliar church and what am I going to do when I leave. I finally set up a time to fly down to the Most Holy Trinity Seminary in Florida to meet with Bishop Sanborn and Fr. Cekada to discuss my situation in person. So I flew out on a Tuesday and met with them to discuss my situation and flew back on Wednesday to be back in the parish. From that point I began to prepare to leave, trying to tie up loose ends and getting all my ducks in a row, so to speak.

The only reason that I had the actual graces sent to me as I came to these conclusions and not to continue in the false religion of the Novus Ordo to continue to offend our Blessed Lord is, I think, by the pity shown to me by our Most Blessed Mother Mary.

Prior to entering the seminary I consecrated myself using St. Louis de Montfort’s consecration to Mary and since then have developed and intensified a great devotion to her and a great love for her, especially to her Immaculate Heart by praying the full Rosary everyday (minus the luminous mysteries, thank you), the BROWN scapular, the Miraculous Medal, reading the great spiritual writings of the saints about her (St. Bernard, St. Alphonsus, St. John Vianney, etc., etc.) and honoring her as best as my sinful self could do. Funny, but in seminary she was not talked about too much in any of the classes. There was only one class on Mariology and it was an elective and at a difficult time for anyone to take. But I believe she has a direct hand in helping me, even when I did not and do not deserve to be helped as much as I have blasphemed and committed sacrilege within the Novus Ordo.

Q. Why did your remain in your pastoral assignment after reaching the conclusion that you were not a true priest? That is, why did you continue simulating sacramental rites that you knew to be offensive to God when you knew yourself not to be a true priest?

A. Ah yes, a most important question and one that will reveal my weaknesses, shortcomings, sinfulness and shame.

The short answer is fear and a misguided sense of responsibility.

After the meetings at the chancery and with the pastor and the immediate light bulb moment, so to speak, of the truth I began to serious look at how I could leave. I began to seriously look at my situation and began to realize how deep I was in the structure of the Novus Ordo.

In retrospect, I had been sent many actual graces while in seminary as I was studying the True Faith compared to the Novus Ordo to embrace the truth, but being born into the Novus Ordo and knowing nothing else I would continue to make the mental gymnastics of rationalization of submission to what this church said, never questioning the fact that there was a possibility that this is a false religion and those who claim to have authority even all the way to the top, have no authority at all. So I would submit my conscience to the Church and that is why I was able to be “ordained” into it, thinking that this was the True Catholic Faith albeit that there were many who practiced things at variance with the Faith but that somehow this was the True Catholic Church. So I would reject those graces sent to me in lieu of this kind of rationalistic mental gymnastics. But as I mentioned, Our Lady was persistent.

Once I came to the conclusion that this wasn’t the Catholic Church, it was a shock to my system, one that paralyzed me for a little while. I knew I had to flee, but I didn’t know what to do. The thoughts of those who were entrusted to me in the parish haunted me as if my leaving would leave them abandoned. I also taught Catholicism in high school so I felt a great responsibility to stay with my students until the end of the year because what I was teaching them was the True Catholic Faith (my reference books were the Baltimore Catechism, the Catechism of the Council of Trent and a few other pre-Vatican II textbooks).

But worst of all, was my own self-preservation started to kick in, in that I let my temporal situation override my spiritual welfare. I had and continue to have bills that must be paid off (old school loan, a bank loan that I have that covered 6 years of seminary and personal expenses) and for the first time in 6 years I could see that in 3 or 4 years I could pay them off with my salary that I was receiving. Add to that fact that I was also giving money to my mother to help her with her bills, let my temporal needs put fear into me.

But once I knew I had to flee I started to rationalize again, thinking that I can finish out the school year and put some money in the bank to give me a little cushion to cover the minimum every month.

Now you see my own weakness and sinfulness at work. In essence, I was selling our Lord again for thirty pieces of silver. This is not false humility but the reality, in all its ugliness, of being a sinner and putting me over that of God.

But through the grace of Our Blessed Savior, often speaking through that of others like Bishops Sanborn and Dolan, Fr. Cekada and Dr. Droleskey I knew I could not continue much longer within the conciliar church. I even would get physically sick after every “Mass” I would say on the weekdays and weekends.

So I set the date to leave to be the second week of March. From there, again to my shame, I started to “sneak around” by gradually moving out of my room on my day off by taking things with me to my mother’s home. I was evasive if not dishonest with those around me as I prepared to leave. As you can see, I have a lot to answer for and to make amends with sacrifice and mortifications for my many mistakes and lack of courage and honesty. I do ask for all the prayers I can get.

Q. How had you planned to leave your conciliar assignment? How did it wind up that you actually left your conciliar assignment?

A. My initial plan as I mentioned was to leave the Thursday of the second week of March. I had planned to leave an explanation letter for the parish, with the school and then to give it to the bishop that day and leave and not look back. I had the great assistance of Bishop Sanborn and Fr. Cekada in the writing of the letters (they did the vast majority of the work) and I started putting together envelopes and things together to mail to the clergy of the diocese and to some of the laity as to why I was leaving. I worked on this at night and kept this in a box in my closet with a bag over the top. This is not how I left, however, as things started to accelerate and the changing of circumstances forced my hand earlier.

Q. How did your pastor justify his rifling through your personal effects on Saturday, February 28, 2009? Do you believe that a civil crime was committed by your pastor? Have you reported this to the police?

A. This is why I left earlier than expected and in more of a rush fashion.

I would always keep the door to my room closed when I left the rectory (my small room was both my living quarters and my office so I kept everything in there) with the understanding that the only person that would enter would be the housekeeper to clean on my day off, and she was very good and honest with her job.

However, I would know when someone had been looking through my paperwork of my drawers as I am very organized and know if anything has been moved (a skill I learned from living with 5 other siblings). I knew that the pastor had been in my room before, especially when I was confronted about the traditional websites as some of the questions asked came from articles I had printed out and kept in a folder in my desk, which I knew was looked through.

I had been out of the parish the day in question and when I came back I saw my door closed but when I entered the room there on the floor next to my desk was a printed schedule for the next week, of which the pastor gives to us. In other words, the only way it could have gotten there was if he had been in my room. So I looked in my closet to check on the box of addressed envelopes and printed letters of departure to see if he saw that and the plastic bag I had over it was thrown to the side and I could tell it had been looked through. So I knew the jig was up, but a little relieved as I began to not be able to look at myself in the mirror from the sneaking around I had been doing.

Sure enough, on Monday my phone was ringing off the hook from the chancery for me to call them and come in immediately for a meeting. I never confronted the pastor or asked him about it as I deserved what I got.

So on Monday, I put the remaining things I had left in my truck and left early to go to the school, worked most of the day on finishing the letters, addressing them, putting into envelopes, etc., taught my last class (not telling the children, freshman, anything) and after class driving to my mother’s home.

I never called back the chancery for my immediate meeting.

On that Tuesday morning, very early I drove to the parish and left for the pastor and the other assistant my letters of departure, my keys, etc. and mailed to the school, the clergy, the laity and the bishop my letters; leaving detailed notes for any loose ends for the parish and the school if they needed it. In essence, it was a cowardly thing to do by not physically giving these things but at this point I was extremely angry at the invasion of my privacy and utterly frustrated and spent to be able to keep my cool and be virtuous in the meetings, plus I knew I would be berated up and down by everyone. So, like pulling off a band-aid, I left quickly and immediately. Again, messy, ugly and weak on my part and I will reap what I have sown. I never once thought about any criminal charges or anything as that would not have helped the situation and would only have come from my own anger.

Q. I am in receipt of the letters you sent to "Bishop" Doran and to your parish staff and your parishioners and members of the clergy of the Diocese of Rockford. Is there anything that you would like to add to your letters?

A. I think the letters are pretty straightforward and express the situation. For all the trouble that this is causing and how the diocese is seeking to punish me to the full extent, I wonder with all the talk that Vatican II and all that goes with it extols on freedom for everything (religion, liberty, conscience, etc.) it seems that it only applies to those things and people who never question the Modernist teachings of the New Church. You would think that my reference to my conscience and how I cannot continue in the Novus Ordo would be respected and valued but it makes no difference to them. I wonder if the threats and eventual reality of being sanctioned and excommunicated, as they are seeking, would be leveled at me if I told them I was leaving to get married, or that I was leaving to be an Anglican or something. Heaven forbid that I am leaving to be an actual Catholic and, God willing, a true Catholic priest and for that “Hell hast no fury like a Modernist scorned!”

Q. What are your future plans?

A. My future plans are that I am going to spend the next few months at my mother’s home resting, recuperating, reading and studying. My family has not embraced my actions, in fact, the news is starting to reach our small town and people are asking them questions and I am afraid that they are more worried about how this will affect them and how people see them than about me. So I will spend the next few months trying to answer questions from them and preparing again for seminary. Plus, on a more positive note, I will get to spend a lot of time with my 2 black labs who are always happy to be with me!

Then in September I will attend Most Holy Trinity Seminary in Florida with Bishop Sanborn and learn and sort through the things that I learned in the conciliar seminary that were good and reject all that wasn’t and to continue to learn the Traditional Catholic Faith in all theological areas, including all the traditional rites of the Church as well as learning Latin. Amazing enough they did not teach Latin in seminary, only offering 2 classes in 5 years that I was there, so we had to try and study on our own. I and others were able to be good in the pronunciation of Latin but I need to understand the mother tongue of the Church. I am not sure how long I must be in seminary again, maybe 3 – 4 years more.

Q. Where do you hope to serve following your conditional ordination to the priesthood after the completion of your additional studies?
A. I will go wherever I would be needed. It would be nice to be able to stay close to my family but wherever those with much more holiness and wisdom than I deem it would be good to go, I’ll go there.

Q. Is there anything else that would like to add, Father Oswalt?

A. Nothing other than I would ask the continued prayers of your readers for me as I continue the ordeal I am in with the diocese and also for those younger clergy in the conciliar church who are trying to be faithful to the True Catholic Church that someday they, too, will come to realize the truth and leave the conciliar church to be a true priest of Jesus Christ. I would also be remiss if I didn’t put a plug in for anyone who would like to help with donations towards my expenses as I embark on this new path. Bishop Sanborn, in his great generosity, will allow me to attend seminary at no expense but I would like to be able to provide for as much as I can on my own to alleviate any burden upon them.

But most of all I ask for your prayers and I hope that your readers will see, minus all the mistakes I have made and continue to make and my own weakness and sinfulness, that it is in large part to the prayers of the faithful remnant that someone like me is able to break free and maybe a seed will be planted to any of the clergy in the conciliar church who is looking to leave and become a true priest by your continual prayers and sacrifices. For this, I am eternally grateful.

Q. Thank you for your time.

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)