Some odd tweets from a priest on Twitter lead me to look at the Congregatio de Institione Catholica Vitae, AKA “Priests for the Restoration of Catholic Life.” It turns out that Bishop Virgil Bradley Tetherow is a key figure in this group. As I was one of the few people who had written about then Fr. Tetherow, I feel the obligation to warn people about this group.
Tetherow, Fr. Stephen Lefort, Bishop Joseph Macek, and Fr. Etienne Videon are the only members I am aware of. There is little information on Macek and Videon online. The first two have very questionable backstories. Let’s look at these two, their sedevacantism, other and why Catholics should not associate with the Congregatio de Institione Catholica Vitae.
(As a side note, the group’s Latin name [Congregatio De Institutione Catholica Vitae] translates “Congregation about the Catholic institution of life.” I use “about,” but “de” has a variety of meanings. I suspect they meant to say “Catholicae” which would change it to “the institution of Catholic life,” as that is much closer to the English name they are using.)
Tetherow Admitted to Possessing Child Pornography
I have written two prior pieces on Tetherow. My first piece quoted the local paper about the basics of the case:
Tetherow was ordained at Our Lady of Guadalupe in Denton, Nebraska, on June 29, 2002.
He was incardinated in the Diocese of Scranton but never given an assignment, according to the grand jury report. […]
On Jan. 17, 2005, the Rev. Michael Kloton, the priest from St. Ann’s, went to Pocono Mountain Regional police to file a report.
According to police records, Kloton brought a 14-page list of computer data and a disc with images of “immoral material” that had been found on a church computer. […]
On Aug. 16, 2005, Tetherow pleaded guilty to criminal use of a communication facility, a felony, and was later sentenced to serve two years of probation. Prosecutors moved to dismiss the remaining charges, including 10 counts of possession of child pornography.
In a written form, Tetherow signed his name acknowledging that he understood all the elements of the crime to which he was pleading guilty.
Lessons to Draw From It
The way this was dealt with shows the limits of what a bishop can do about a misbehaving priest. I summarize this in my latter article:
In my prior post, I drew three conclusions from his case. First, the Dallas charter generally works as things seemed properly dealt with once child pornography was found. Second, the Church is limited in what it can do about priests who abused. The Church kicked him out of the clerical state and cooperated fully with authorities, but having Church jails or similar would be problematic (& I doubt any of us want that). As he pled down to a lesser charge, he was not registered as a sex offender so there isn’t much even the state can do once he served his time. Finally, I noted we need vigilance. We need vigilance to watch out for abusers and then to warn others about abusers once they are discovered.
Lefort Suspended Over Being Inappropriate in Confession
Fr. Stephen Lefort lists being a member of Priests for the Restoration of Catholic Life on his Twitter account. However, Lefort was suspended from ministry in his home diocese in Louisiana over being inappropriate in the confession. The diocese noted:
A canonical process, authorized by the Vatican and conducted in accordance with the requirements of the motu proprio of Pope St. John Paul II entitled Sacramentorum Sanctitatis Tutela, has yielded a final determination that Father Stephen Lefort has been found guilty of disobedience and of improper behavior regarding questions asked to minors in confession resulting in his being perpetually forbidden ministry to minors and ministry in settings in which minors are or may be present, such as conventional parochial worship or school events or youth ministry services. Because of the serious nature of his improper behavior and his continuing refusal even to meet with the bishop, Stephen Lefort will remain unassigned and will possess no faculties for ministry in the Diocese of Houma-Thibodaux. This information is shared in accord with the demands of transparency, out of an abundance of caution, and in the interest of proper pastoral care.
That this has been approved of and authorized by the Vatican indicates that Fr. Lefort has had ample opportunity to defend himself. The Vatican has safeguards to prevent a bishop from imposing such limits based on spurious accusations, so I have to presume these were substantial or repeated.
Sedevacantism Is Wrong (& Priests for the Restoration of Catholic Life are Sedevacantists)
Masek, Tetherow and Lefort have publicly expressed sedevacantism: they believe there is no legitimate Pope. (As so little information is out there on Videon, I have to presume he is too.) This is a problem for Catholics, even those who prefer extraordinary form. It alone is ample reason to avoid their Masses.
My prior pieces mentioned Tetherow’s schism. He was already forbidden from saying Mass. Sedevacantism just adds to the scandal he is creating.
Lefort’s bishop issued a formal decree of excommunication for schism and heresy after he declared sedevacantism, although Lefort would already be excommunicated automatically (latae sententiae). It concludes noting Lefort “is now entirely irregular for the exercise of holy orders pursuant to the Code of Canon Law. As a result therefore, the Christian faithful are informed that Father Lefort is forbidden to celebrate or receive the sacraments, hold any office, or exercise any ministry or functions within the Catholic Church.”
Most Sedevacantism claims are unreliable. But Lefort has made claims below even elementary research. He tweeted (archived version): “I just realized that Denzinger’s ‘The Sources of Catholic Dogma’ follows the decrees and dogmas of all the True Popes and Ecumenical Councils… and it stops at the death of Pius XII.” Not realizing he just had an old edition printed back then. The first result for “Denzinger” on Amazon gives you a newer edition (about 10 years old – which I own and regularly use) that goes partway through Benedict XVI’s pontificate.
Limited Other Info on These Four
There is a little more online about these four.
Many trad sites list Bishop Macek, but at most I can find where he has been (West Virginia and Florida), and that he was ordained in the Catholic church, questioned the validity of Catholic rites so was conditionally re-ordained using the old rite in 1988 or 1998, then consecrated bishop in 1999 and conditionally reconsecrated in 2001. The conditional re-ordination and both consecrations were by bishops in schism with Rome, and done without authorization. By 1 of the 2 consecrating him, Macek is a Thuc-line bishop. Many sedevacantist Catholic bishops can be traced back to Ngô Đình Thục, a Vietnamese archbishop at the time of Vatican II.
Lefort says he was conditionally re-ordained a priest by Macek. Macek also attended Tetherow’s chapel back when it started.
All I can find of Videon is that he authored pieces on the organization’s website. (I cannot find anything else.)
I cannot find how Tetherow became a bishop or how valid it is, but given the circumstances, I would assume Macek consecrated him.
Priests for the Restoration of Catholic Life or Congregatio de Institione Catholica Vitae
Fr. Lefort’s Twitter alerted me to the Priests for the Restoration of Catholic Life. I noticed the connection as the address of the institute is the same as Tetherow’s “Mass site.” The website for this organization does not list members or have any indication of its size. One page on their website also shows that show they have not even set it up correctly.
When a top member of this organization admitted to possessing child pornography, and the second most visible member has issues was removed from ministry for being inappropriate in confession, and the group and its members made multiple unsubstantiated (and ultimately false) claims, it would not be good for Catholics to associate with it. Please do not attend Mass of the Priests for the Restoration of Catholic Life (Congregatio De Institutione Catholica Vitae) or otherwise associate with them. My prior article listed a few extraordinary form Masses near their location in Pennsylvania that would be preferred if you like that form of the Mass.
How are people like Tetherow ordained let alone made a bishop!? These church leaders were the problem back in the 50’s and 60’s just as they are now. I refer to this story on him. http://www.saintspeterandpaulrcm.com/OPEN%20LETTERS/TETHEROW.htm He should have been laicized. You are in my prayers Father Schneider.
He was laicized. I think the Church actually did a pretty good job responding when illegal images of kids were found & that was my first piece on him. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/throughcatholiclenses/2019/01/the-limits-of-what-a-church-can-do-with-a-misbehaving-priest/
Unfortunately, once a priest we can’t un-ordain him. So, he started saying Mass in a small chapel in direct disobedience to his laicization. Then found some bishop also disobeying the Church to elevate him to the episcopacy.
Father, you said: “having Church jails or similar would be problematic (& I doubt any of us want that)”. Actually, it is quite distressing to see a near utter lack of consequences for clergy who violate their vows, let alone secular laws. It would be a relief to know that a priest who had done real harm was not simply given a pat on the head and a new post in a far away diocese (or in the Vatican!). I think the impunity causes a great deal of loss of morale among lay people. Why should I bother to try harder or do better if even my leaders are not required to bother keeping the commandments or showing a modicum of respect for their holy mission?
They are removed from the clerical state so can’t just go to some other diocese.
If they violate any civil law, they should also be punished to the extent the law allows. But unfortunately, not every act that will get you kicked out active ministry is a crime and some crimes don’t necessarily have the evidence for a beyond reasonable doubt conviction so prosecutors might not pursue it, or in Tetherows’ case offer a plea deal (I have to know more detail than is public to determine if a plea deal is prudent).
dernist, the author is irresponsible. You “Fr.” Matthew don’t have the exact information.
One wonders why he did not contact each of the Bishops and Priests he accuses? Why don’t he investigate more about the Congregation? The answer is simple, because it is a harmful, main note of the novus ordo. For information, the good information of many; Bp. Tetherow was consecrated by Bp. Macek, and not only the priests mentioned here are the only members of the Congregation. Fr. Palacio serves as a priest in Colombia, Fr. Leatherby serves in California and other priests in different states of our country.
So let the readers of this clown realize the rubbish he writes.
Thank you for confirming what I had assumed about Tetherow’s consecration.
I could not find anything on Fr. Palacio. Do you have a full name and / or links to his information?
One of the first things on Fr. Letherby was he was excommunicated for schism: this is a serious offense so no Catholic should go to a Mass of his as celebrating publicly is grave matter (likely mortal sin) for him.
The second thing I found was: “The Catholic Herald has learned that the Sacramento priest excommunicated for schism earlier this month is accused of grave crimes, including sexual abuse of at least one adult woman, spiritual and psychological abuse, abuse of the Sacrament of Confession and other Sacraments, and multiple violations of the Seal of Confession… The accuser – who has requested anonymity as a victim of sexual abuse and because she and her family have faced threats and intimidation from supporters of Fr. Leatherby – alleges that Fr. Leatherby initially invited her into a “spiritual friendship” with him, modeled on the friendship of Sts. Francis and Claire of Assisi, and then used that relationship to manipulate her, threaten her marriage, and upend her life. She alleges Leatherby frequently used her as an instrument of his own gratification in sexual and other ways over a period of roughly six years, from 2008 to 2014.” Anyone interested can keep reading: https://www.catholicanada.com/2020/08/jeremy-leatherby-details-emerge-of-charges-against-excommunicated-priest/
And then in an article noting his removal from the clerical state, “‘The woman who brought the initial accusation and her family have suffered more than has been revealed. Along with her testimony, other accounts of the silent suffering of women have been laid upon my heart,” Soto wrote. / The bishop added that while the canonical trial did not come to a resolution before Leatherby requested laicization, he believed the priest had indeed acted inappropriately.” https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/46447/priest-who-denied-pope-francis-laicized-bishop-urges-reparation-for-clergy-sexual-abuse
Both of those are solidly not modernist sources. Sedevacantism is sufficient grounds to recommend against this group but multiple members with serious substantiated or admitted (in Tetherow’s case) sexual crimes where people were admitted or promoted with those crimes being fully known creates another obstacle.
My piece was not intended to argue every detail of their life but provide sufficient information to warn Catholics against becoming part.
I understand that Fr. Pablo Palacio is a young priest from South America, a former member of the SSPX, trained in his seminary in Argentina, he took the sedevacantist position and left the SSPX, received the Holy Orders of sedevacantist Bishops and was ordained a priest by Bp Tetherow on June 11 last year.
I do not know if he has social media or links, I only know that he serves as a priest of the Congregation in Medellin, Columbia.
Since it tangentially relates to the subject of Father Schneider’s piece I will start by saying that I think that the liturgical changes that were instituted during the middle decades of the 20th century have been a disaster. The underlying sense of the divine presence in the Mass and in the Divine Office, that little contact with eternity that was brought to the senses of those who attended by using an ancient language that was spoken in the world when Christ walked the earth and by the use of prayers whose words were so old that the hills don’t even remember who composed them, is now completely gone with the outward presentation of Catholic liturgical life having completely surrendered itself to the ephemeral and confused tastes of our contemporary world.
That said we need to follow where the Church directs us to go in this regard even if (and especially if) we don’t like it. So many of these Latin Mass groups have proven themselves to be stricken by the same problems that they condemn in the wider Church: chronic disobedience, equally chronic twisting of various Catholic teachings to suit their own agenda, and lets just charitably say problems with certain sexual sins. We just need to stay with Christ wherever He is. No matter how messed up things are externally in the Church we have to say with her. We can’t go running off to some group who promises us a better experience at Mass if we just sacrifice our unity with the Church. because there is nothing there but a wasteland.
I knew Tetherow way back at the end of 1998, right after he left the Franciscans. He and Isaac, another brother from the same Franciscans were planning to start a Franciscan group under the banner of a priestly society. That didn’t work out and it was suggested to them to go on their own to Bishop Timlin. The brothers were highly regarded by everyone in the area and their reputation grew. They had great potential at the time.
But the Brothers did not get along and had disagreements with each other. Isaac agreed Gabriel was his superior, but would fight with him, mostly over money matters.
Then they betrayed someone who gave them high support and lead them to major benefactors. A short time later promises were denied and gaslighting became widespread around the US, doing great harm to the reputation to the person who helped build them up. That person’s reputation has never been recovered.
It is sad the direction Tetherow had taken with the gifts God had given him. He turned away the graces he was given by God and betraying those who trusted and followed him in those early days. He could have done so much with the opportunities God gave him then. Isaac was at fault as well in refusing the opportunity for greater graces and worrying about money.
So you have it! The story goes on in different and conflicting directions. It is sad to see any priest fall. All priests are human men, and can fall, whether he be a “traditionalists”, “liberal”, “orthodox”, Eastern”, etc. We must pray for them. Judgment is around the corner for all of us.
also bishop tetherow is listed on lux vera directory usa
This article is by an apostate heretic of the novus ordo sect which pretends to be Roman Catholic, which does not apostolic succession and by that no validly ordained priests and valid sacraments due to the changes brought about by the homosexual sodomite Paul vi, idolatrous jp2 and Frankie the Freemason, the creed is different , the catechism is different and the doctrine and canon law is different. St Augustine states an apostate cannot be a pope , dare you contradict a doctor of the church ?
You say a lot of words, but they don’t necessarily seem coherent. We still pray the same creed from Nicaea in 325, modified in 381 at the council of Constantinople. The doctrine is still the same and any changes in canon law are changes that touch on practices that the Church &/or Pope have the authority to change, like stating that bishops in a country should form themselves into a conference to help each other out. Then you make a bunch of claims about recent Popes which are unsubstantiated & contrary to available evidence.
Youre going to Hell Mr Schneider. Your false accusations and slander are grave sins…
He never plead guilty to possession of child pornography, those charges were dropped. So you have no right to assert false accusations simply to promote your own heretical narrative.
He plead to a lesser charge in a plea deal but the plea deal included him admitting to CP. The local paper covered it well: https://www.ydr.com/story/news/watchdog/2018/11/15/rogue-priest-father-tetherow-gabriel-convicted-child-porn-st-michael-archangel-roman-catholic-church/1998395002/
Fr. Schneider, God bless you and strengthen you Christ Jesus. I read that there are comments for the Novus Ordo here, and against it. I realize you’re not against Tradition, but I read that you are unaware of why some of us are against the new mass. You would have been trained in a new mass seminary, so that would be where you’re coming from. I was novus ordo for most of my life, but I was taught with the Baltimore Catechism. There were so many times when I would be confused by the difference between what was being taught by the Church of our time, as compared to what was being taught in the past. Now that I have knowledge of the past and have seen the Traditional Latin Mass, I understand what is going on. Maybe if you look at Quo Primum, you would understand better what happened from Pope John XXIII to Pope Francis. I’m not a sedevacantist, but I also see what Pope Francis is working toward. Also, look for Our Lady of Good Success. May the Blessed Mother keep you safe under her mantle. Thank you for answering God’s call to the priesthood, Father.
I have learned extraordinary form and support having it where there are sufficient people who benefit from it, I support it.
SorryFather Matthew you were right about Bishop Tetherow, he is a laicised priest,
not even a Bishop, ordained by Bishop Tuc, I think, without being a priest, is that
possible.
Rita DeVries
He can be validly but illicitly consecrated a bishop. For a valid ordination of a Roman Catholic bishop you need either direct permission from the Pope or indirect permission due to inability to communicate with Rome (in the modern world, this latter one is only for those under oppressive regimes like if you were a bishop in North Korea near death or likely soon to be imprisoned and the government would not let you write to Rome, you could consecrate your successor assuming Rome approves, but this does not at all apply in a situation like this).
JMJ
It seems your emphasis here with regards to schism is focused on Sedevacantism. I for one, am tired of all the ignorant, judgmental and biased commentary on this subject from people who cannot even define in totality what the term “Sedevacantism” is (or is not). Aside from Scripture and Tradition what do the Fathers, Doctors and Theologians have to say on this subject? If they do not say anything other than focusing on the interim between a dead pope and the selection of a new pope by an enclave, that IMHO, is insufficient to make a definitive declaration against those Catholics who believe that Sedevacantism exists presently. I, for one, agree with Archbishop Vigano’s recent commentary/ question about how can Jesus allow such a situation to exist since the 1960s, with the implications that Bishops and Priests ordained are not legitimate as well as the Sacraments. Vigano, like me looks at the outright heresy and apostasy that is presently occurring in the Vatican that causes us to wonder. And before announcing that Vigano is excommunicated, I suggest you focus on my and his commentary instead of on who he is or is not. Lastly, there are a number of bona-fides Catholic Prophecies from Blessed and Venerable Saints that inform us that at the end of this Fifth Epoch (Venerable Holzhauser’s term) the Chair of Peter, the Vicar of Christ will be empty for some time, e.g. The Ecstatic of Tours. So, I recommend your scholastic efforts to acquire knowledge on the subject of Sedevacantism before casting stones at those Catholics who, for lack of good, learned Catholic Leadership, migrate to such a conclusion on their own.
Yours in Christ — Nich
Sedevacantism is defined as a belief that the the chair of St. Peter is empty and there is no valid Pope. As schism is breaking Communion with the valid, by definition sedevacantists are schismatic.
Why do you take the words of an elderly archbishop who has progressively gotten stranger over the years and unapproved prophecy over the overwhelming evidence of Scripture, tradition and magisterium?