Based on the fact that this radio interview will involve Fr. Cekada, and it talks about the SSPX.
I do not see how this interview will be a edifying one.
As I recall, Fr. Cekada and a few others filed a lawsuit against Archbishop Lefebvre in order to evict the SSPX seminary in Connecticut.
I quote from Bishop Williamson:
Indeed, it wasn't "The Nine" who took the Archbishop to court, but rather five of "The Nine".
According to Bishop Williamson, as is recorded in Volume I - The Ridgefield Letters, pg 34-35:
On Sunday night, May 20, when the Archbishop arrived back at the Seminary at a late hour from Kansas, somewhat tired and travel-weary, no sooner had he stepped out of the car than he was served with a civil court summons in a suit to evict the Society from the seminary property here in Connecticut, a suit filed by Fathers Cekada, Dolan, Jenkins, Kelly and Sanborn. Those standing by noticed and will not easily forget the look of pain on the face of the Archbishop, who it must be remembered was their Father in the priesthood. Now according to the old Code of Canon Law, anyone citing a Catholic Bishop before a civil judge incurs automatic excommunication (Canon 2341). Hence, according to the only Code of Canon Law which they themselves recognize
, these five priests are excommunicated!
Canon 2341: If anyone, in violation of canon 120, dare to summon before a lay tribunal a Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, or a Legate of the Holy See, or any other major official of the Roman Curia in connection with business pertaining to his office, or his own Ordinary, he incurs ipso facto an excommunication specially reserved to the Holy See; if he dare to summon in the same manner another Bishop, even merely titular, or an Abbot or Prelate nullius, or the highest superior of a religious institute approved by the Holy Seem he incurs an excommunication latae sententiae simply reserved to the Holy See; finally, if, without having obtained the permission of the Ordinary of the place, he dare to summon in the same manner any other person who has the privilegium fori, the culprit, if a cleric, incurs ipso facto suspension from office reserved to the Ordinary; if a lay person, he shall be punished by his own Ordinary with suitable penalties according to the gravity of the case.
Archbishop Lefebvre was the defendant; neither the Archbishop nor the SSPX initiated the civil law suit brought against them by Fr. Cekada, et al.
Any man who can do such a cowardly act against his own Bishop who ordained him,
. Alex, prudence above all.
I will not continue.
God bless. I will not listen in to the interview.
Bp. Williamson's comments — published, incidentally, by Stephen Heiner's True Restoration Press, the same entity that hosted the interview with me!
— only tell SSPX's "official" history of the rather complex story of the lawsuits.
The incident described above occurred only AFTER Abp. Lefebvre and company had ALREADY sued us in a New York court. So what? He could sue US but we couldn't sue BACK?
If you want to read the other side of the lawsuit story, you should read this:
----------------------------------------------------THE NINE VS. LEFEBVRE:
WE RESIST YOU TO YOUR FACE
Rev. Anthony Cekadahttp://www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/NineVLefebvre.pdf
The history of our court battle (1983-1987) with Abp. Marcel Lefebvre and the Society of St. Pius X.
(1) Contributing Factors:
The mentality of the Nine. Abp. Lefebvre's change of course after the death of his great enemy, Paul VI, and his negotiations with "Rome". What kind of organization is SSPX, anyway? Shifting policies on property.
(2) Theological Issues:
Abp. Lefebvre allows doubtfully-ordained priests to work in SSPX. The John XXIII (Bugnini) Missal. Summary expulsions of priests. SSPX as substitute magisterium.
Loyalty to the "positions" of Abp. Lefebvre above all. Acceptance of phony annulments.
(3) The April 1983 Break
: Fr. Sanborn's removal. The April 27 showdown with Abp. Lefebvre and the expulsions.
(4) The Lawsuits.
A multi-front battle.
(5) The Settlement.
The "silver bullet." Settlement negotiations. SSPX takes a buyout — and gets stung by its own paranoia.
(6) Effects of the Suits
. For SSPX: America under foreign masters, loyalty oaths, the Nine as boogey-men, pastoral setbacks. Subsequent apostolate of the Nine: theological studies, other bishops, seminaries, contacts with other clergy. America as a "sedevacantist bastion." (PDF, Internet, October 2008)
(would have just quoted that part, but Fr's html forum skills are so boss that I couldn't bring myself to)