[ultima ratio]

"Namely, if the priest was guilty of homosexual relations with a young boy in South America, and this caused him to be kicked out of the SSPX the first time, when the SSPX subsequently restored him (and why did they restore him if the allegations were true?), why did the SSPX post him to their North American seminary?"

Because many of the men in S.America had been falsely slandered and were innocent. Archbishop Lefebvre was aware of this and so accepted the men--conditionally, advising that they were to be closely watched. They were--and were booted out subsequently.

[Theosis]

"Because many of the men in S.America had been falsely slandered and were innocent. Archbishop Lefebvre was aware of this and so accepted the men--conditionally, advising that they were to be closely watched. They were--and were booted out subsequently."

Tsk..tsk... you're not admitting that SSPX clergy falsely slander one another now, are you? That being said, after all your griping against the Novus Ordo bishops, excuse if I sound suspicious that rather than transfer him to an administrative position, the appointed him as a seminary professor, which essentially places him in a position of authority in a private setting over a number of single young men, at a seminary overseen by a conspiracy theorist. As good as each of them is at spinning a yarn, I'm not even sure that Malachi Martin or Andrew Greeley could write a novel that would allow me to suspend my disbelief long enough to accept such a plot line...