No, thanks
Traditionalist Issues
donate Books CDs HOME updates search contact

SSPX Covering for Homo-Pedo Priests – Part 3

SSPX Hierarchy’s ‘Justice’:
The Good Expelled, the Bad Promoted

Patrick Odou
In the previous articles (here and here) I have shown that, under the direct watch of Bishops Alfonso Galaretta and Richard Williamson and the indirect involvement of Arch. Marcel Lefebvre, the homo-pedo Fr. Carlos Urrutigoity was protected, trained, educated, ordained, appointed spiritual director and promoted to professorship within the SSPX.

Despite the considerable number of witnesses who accused Urrutigoity at La Reja Seminary, Bishop Galaretta did nothing even after “he acknowledged his mistake,” according to Fr. Andres Morello. Arch. Lefebvre, “who had reviewed the Morello dossier,” ordered Williamson to keep him in the Winona Seminary but watch him “like a hawk.” (Cf. Randy Engel, The Rite of Sodomy, p. 964).

map oflimitations

States that had changed their statutes of limitations to protect victims of pedophile priests

Author Randy Engel in the mentioned book deals with details of the Urrutigoity case. She shows that, after leaving the SSPX, he continued to cause the same type of problems wherever he went. Then, he fled to South America to avoid prison.

An interesting datum that has entered the panorama recently is that most of the States in the U.S. have passed laws abolishing the previous statutes of limitations for the cases of sexual abuse of minors. (See map of the States above) In other words, those who benefited from the limitations, like Fr. Urrutigoity, can now be prosecuted and sentenced to jail in the U.S. if proved guilty. I wonder whether, given these new circumstances, the superiors of SSPX could also be brought to court today for their past complacence.

Henceforth, let me focus on actions of the SSPX hierarchy vs Fr. Morello in the Urrutigoity affair. In so doing, the reader will have conditions to evaluate the obliterated sense of vigilance and justice of the SSPX directors.

Williamson derails canonical investigation, protects homo-pedo(s)

As rector of La Reja seminary during the entire stay of Urrutigoity, Fr. Morello had received many complaints about his disgusting homo-pedo behavior. He took the matter seriously, gathered facts and asked the witnesses to write a report.


Williamson broke the confidentiality of the report & showed it to Urrutigoity

These initiatives produced a dossier that Morello sent to those in positions of authority: Arch. Lefebvre; Bp. Galaretta, District Superior for South America; Bp. Williamson, rector of the Winona SSPX seminary in USA. Fr. Morello asked the superiors to start a canonical investigation concerning Urrutigoity and others.

As Fr. Morello wrote to Dr. Bond:

“His [Urrutigoity’s] imminent ordination to the major orders obliged me in conscience to write a confidential report to the rector of the Winona seminary, Bishop Williamson, in order to stop the ordination.” (1)

But Williamson broke the confidentiality of this report by showing it to Urrutigoity.

Morello continues:

“A canonical report of such characteristics demanded reciprocal confidentiality, and in particular to keep it secret from the person in question. Bishop Williamson made it known to the then seminarian Urrutigoity so that he could defend himself from our accusations.”

This is confirmed by what Dr. Bond heard directly from Bp. Williamson:

“Bishop Williamson further explained [to me] that when seminarian Urrutigoity arrived in Winona, he was questioned and given the opportunity to write a defense, or ‘manifestation of conscience,’ in response to the accusations against him.”

Dr. Bond states that the canonical investigation was requested for other SSPX priests as well:

“Fr. Morello requested a canonical investigation of certain SSPX priests.”

Were these priests or seminarians at La Reja? Who, and how many, were these certain other priests? What was the nature of their faults? Were their faults against nature like Urrutigoity’s? I do not know since the canonical investigation was blocked and opposed by Bp. Williamson; probably in collaboration with Bp. Galaretta, and possibly following orders of Arch. Lefebvre.

Bishop Alfonso Galarreta

Bp. Galarreta & Arch. Levebvre were perfectly aware of the cover-up

Marcel Lefebvre
So, Bp. Williamson deliberately violated the confidentiality called for between the two rectors of two SSPX seminaries – Williamson in Winona and Morello in La Reja. As is known, in any serious hierarchical institution, such as the Military, confidentiality between commanding officers concerning actions of soldiers is strictly maintained. As a result of the actions of Bp. Williamson – and of Bp. Galaretta – the canonical investigations of a group of questionable SSPX priests never started.

As in most of the cover-ups happening in the Progressivist Church since Vatican II, it is difficult to get precise dates regarding the priests of the SSPX involved in that report. In the Conciliar Church most of the details that are known today were exposed in court cases by laymen. In SSPX the homo-pedo scandals were also happening around 1987, 13 years before the clerical sexual abuse cover-ups became front page news in 2000.

So, concerning sexual abuse and cover-up, we see that the SSPX Bishops were behaving no differently from the Conciliar Bishops. All this was done, I believe, to fool the grassroots and induce them to keep a favorable image of the SSPX hierarchy.

In a step further, Bp. Williamson came to Urrutigoity’s defense and gave him the opportunity to write his “manifestation of conscience” to Arch. Lefebvre and himself: “According to Bishop Williamson, Archbishop Lefebvre, after reading Urrutigoity’s defense, told Bishop Williamson to admit Urrutigoity to the seminary, but to ‘watch him like a hawk.’”

By 1989, the ordination of Urrutigoity was imminent. The concerned Fr. Morello flew from South America to Winona in a final attempt to stop that ordination. But he was confronted by the recently anointed Bishop Williamson (Fathers Williamson, Galaretta, Fellay and Mallerais were consecrated Bishops by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on June 30, 1988). Fr. Morello reports: “Bishop Williamson read to us the defense of Fr. Urrutigoity, defended his [Urrutigoity’s] ‘humility’ and accused us of lying. A few days later, on July 16, 1989, I was expelled from the Society.”

All the upright efforts of Fr. Morello, actions of a responsible rector, were met with violent accusations, completely blocked and finally he was the one who was punished. The ones who benefited from Williamson’s actions were Urrutigoity and the other anonymous sexual predators.

Fr. Morello expelled from SSPX


Urrutigoity ordained in the SSPX, Fr. Morello expelled...

Among the clergy, the only one I see who did his duty during this entire Urrutigoity affair was Fr. Andres Morello; and for that he was expelled from the Society of St. Pius X. He states that he was expelled because he requested a canonical investigation of some Society priests:

“I was expelled because of a denunciation or better said a confidential request I made for a canonical investigation of some priests of the Society of St. Pius X.”

One last point, Bp. Williamson stated to Dr. Jeffrey Bond that he never saw any homosexual behavior in Urrutigoity during his 10 years at Winona…

But this will be a subject for the next article.


  1. In this article the quotes without sources are from Letter to Friends, Sept. 2, 2002, by Dr. Jeffrey Bond, President of The College of St. Justin Martyr, Pennsylvania

Blason de Charlemagne
Follow us

Posted January 27, 2020

Related Topics of Interest
Related Works of Interest

Volume I
A_Offend1.gif - 23346 Bytes

Volume II
Animus Injuriandi II

Volume III

Volume IV
A_Offend1.gif - 23346 Bytes

Volume V
Animus Injuriandi II

Volume VI
destructio dei

Volume VII
fumus satanae

Volume VIII

Volume IX
volume 10

Volume X

Volume XI
A_hp.gif - 30629 Bytes

Special Edition