Saturday, October 24, 2015


...obscene ravens, clamorous o'er the dead. Shelley

The money-mad cult clergy kicked off their annual All Souls' drive for your dollars in the September SGG newsletter. Then last week's Sunday's bulletin prominently featured a page-one notice of envelopes eagerly waiting in the pews for Gerties to fill in the names of the dearly departed for this year's frenzied greenback-grabbing fiesta and clerical cash windfall. (The envelope is a silent, unsubtle reminder for cultlings to stuff it with bucks before dropping it in the collection basket.)*

We want to advise you all to keep your money in your pocket in case you mistakenly believe the SGG "priests" will be offering Mass at a privileged altar.** (That's a cruel fiction under which many traddies seem to labor.***)

As an aged Spanish Dominican told us last month, sede altars cannot be privileged. In ecclesiastical law, you see, a privilege is a favor or right conceded by proper authority. Seeing that Tradistan's prelatasters possess neither authority nor jurisdiction, they cannot designate an altar as privileged nor can they concede their "clergy" a personal privilege.

To the extent that sedes affirm there is no authority in what passes for the Church visible, they couldn't possibly receive such a privilege from the Holy See, even if it were granted. Furthermore, since sede chapels and Mass centers have not been erected by competent ecclesiastical authority within Church territory -- geography in this matter is at best a secondary consideration -- their altars are ineligible for the Church's general concession for All Souls' Day or Forty Hours.

Now all this doesn't mean you shouldn't request a Mass to be said for the poor souls. Of course you should, even if the priest is a sede. But we do pose one big caveat: If you're going to use a sede, you should be completely certain the celebrant is validly ordained.

So the question for Gerties and Gertie-groupies is this:

Do you honestly and truly believe "One-Hand Dan" and the "priests" he's "ordained" possess valid orders?

If you have the slightest reservation, save your money and wait until you find a priest whose orders are unassailable.

The holy souls in Purgatory will surely be grateful.

* The cult loves to criticize the SSPX, but at least the society has the decency and honesty to make clear in its effort to relieve suffering souls that "no stipend is required for this act of charity" (District superior's October 1, 2105, letter to the faithful).

** Such as altar is "one at which a plenary indulgence may be gained, usually for a soul in Purgatory, by the celebration and application of a Mass. The privilege is either local (belonging to any priest at a particular altar) or personal (to a particular priest at any altar) or mixed (to certain priests at certain altars). To have a local privilege an altar must be consecrated" (Attwater, A Catholic Dictionary).

*** Several years ago we heard that, in reply to a pious woman's inquiry about a privileged altar at the SW Ohio cult center, a grossly malformed "Young Father" replied something to the effect, "I don't know which one it is, but, yes, there is one." 


  1. Wait for a priest whose orders are "unassailable"? You'll be waiting a long, long time. (Forever is a long time). SSPX? No, Lefebvre was invalidly ordained by a Freemason. CMRI? No, Thuc was out of his mind. SSPV? No, Mendez was old and senile. FSSP? No, the New Rites are invalid, and the new bishops who employ the old Rite are therefore invalid.

    There are clowns like yourself, who throw doubt on all. Now, "one-handed" nonsense. Why not attack the Novus Ordo Church and try to convert souls? If Dolan is as bad as you say, people will figure it out without your "help."
    People should read and follow the suggestions of intelligent websites such as Novus Ordo Watch, Christ or Chaos (does not impugn orders of Dolan) and Introibo ad altare Dei, who has shown your doubt to be more than dubious!

  2. Introibo has demonstrated nothing, other than that he is a cultist lackey. We've demonstrated beypond any doubt that Checkie's defense of one-handed orders is full of errors and that Dannie must seek conditional orders. Since he won't, people need reminding of his dubious orders so they won't waste their good money.

    1. Ah, no. Introibo has been blogging for several years and he's a NYC lawyer, not even close to SGG. He also stated point blank he attends SSPV and doesn't even know Dolan.

      Second, you never overcame the presumption in Church law that two hands were used. A letter signed by nine priests who weren't there and unknown "witnesses" doth not a case make.

      Third, you didn't answer my question:
      Why not attack the Novus Ordo Church and try to convert souls? If Dolan is as bad as you say, people will figure it out without your "help."

    2. We know all about Introibo. Perhaps you're unaware that in addition to the American priests who were well informed of the 1976 mishap, we have eyewitness testimony from individuals who were in the sanctuary that day. Plus, "One Hand" also knows the truth, and that's the one who counts. Our charitable efforts are aimed at getting him to seek re-ordination and re-consecration so that his cultlings get their money's worth.

  3. Doesn't anyone proofread that 'Bishop's Corner' before printing it for the world to see? Every week there's misspelled words, typos &/or bad grammar. It's embarrassing. "Angel's Break"?? 2 points there. Then there's racoon used twice & then spelled correctly later on!!
    Is it because they're letting High School students put it together for practice?

    1. We can't figure that question out either. The actual bulletin sometimes contains the correct spelling while the homepage post features the screaming errors.

      Our only explanation to date has been that they must post the text directly as it comes from Dannie. Then whoever does the bulletin fixes most of Dannie's errors.

      But your suggestion that students put it together is intriguing. The educational level at cult schools is so low that they wouldn't be able to spot such typos as "Break" for "Bread" etc. or correct the grammar slips.

      It's a real sloppy operation down there in every respect (and getting even messier with the vermin infestation that will never go away).

  4. Anon. 10-25, 2:03 AM (and 3:47 AM): You should be a comedian – a sick one, but a comic just the same. By eliminating LeFebvre’s “validity,” you eliminated Dannie's as well!! And, speaking of “validity,” the article was NOT about the validity or pedigree of different groups or clerics. It was about PRIVILEGED ALTARS – which can be sanctioned ONLY by competent ecclesiastic authority, i.e., the institutional Church. Stick to the subject matter, Moron!

    Furthermore, all of the accusations and wild assumptions that you made were merely ASSERTIONS, with absolutely NOTHING to back them up. And by citing “Introibo” and Droleskey (Christ or Chaos) as your “authorities,” you’ve exposed yourself (again) as the mindless drudge that you are. To repeat, if you want to “comment,” please address the article’s SUBJECT, and NOT some tangential issue of your own.

    1. Good points, Watcher.

      We think Anon. 10-15, 2:03 AM was trying to jerk our chain for using the term "unassailable." Now maybe for him Thuc orders are compromised, but that's not so for us. Several years ago a layman put aside all reasonable doubts about the Thuc line, and his arguments have never been rebutted in a scholarly manner.

      Now, of course, anybody can assail anything, and in that sense, nothing then is "unassailable." But in the world of the intellect, it's only the substantive objections that count as a threat to certainty When those objections have been thoroughly defeated by reason and fact, then the wise man rests comfortably in his assurance until a legitimate counter argument arises. Since none has surfaced since the publication of the brilliant layman's study, Thuc orders in our mind ARE unassailable. Hence Anon's attempt to dig at us failed because he assumed we shared his doubts.

      It's the same situation with Dannie's orders. Years ago, many people believed that Cekada's "Validity of Ordination Conferred with One Hand" had answered the 9 priests' judgment that "we must hold your [one-handed] ordination to be dubious."
      Later everyone thought Cekada had provided the evidence the nine requested to show that Dannie's "one-handed ordination is certainly valid." Accordingly, they were assured and treated Dannie as a valid.

      However, now that we have rebutted/refuted Cekada's error-filled monograph (especially with our unassailable demonstration that he mistranslated Pius XII's infallible teaching to prove his thesis), all those original doubts are back in full force -- or should be back in full force if people are intellectually honest..

      The doubts are not only back but they are back with enhanced force, because corroborative testimony has come forth from eyewitnesses in the sanctuary, one of them saying that only Dan got the one-handed ordination.

      With the increasing discussion of the issue abroad, no one can now be assured of Dan's orders. They are assailable again because the reasons and facts upon which they were accepted (viz. the content of Cekada's awful monograph) have been refuted/rebutted.

      What's whacky is that Dannie could end all this ruckus in an instant. All he has to do is to ask Big Don, one of the signatories to the 1990 letter, to conditionally ordain and consecrate him.

    2. To Watcher:
      1. I am sticking to the subject matter. This post declares that one should only give money to those clerics with unassailable orders to offer Masses for the dead.
      2. I pointed out that the SSPV--the very priests that Pistrina relies upon to cast doubt on Dolan's orders--deny the validity of Thuc ordinations and have written about that. Therefore, they must be morally certain Thuc was not in his right mind (look at the whole Palmar de Troya fiasco). Hence, reasonable doubt exists on your basic premises.
      3. Yes, if Lefebvre is invalid, so is Dolan, but not due to the " one-hand" farce. No witnesses = no case. Nameless witness are non-existent.
      4. Mendez has been questioned as to his mental state by his own family.
      5. The new rites of episcopal consecration have been assailed as invalid. Bye FSSP.
      6. My point being that NONE of these objections holds up upon inspection; especially YOURS! Introibo has done a masterful job proving you have not overcome the presumption that 2 hands were used. A letter from nine priests who weren't there and unknown "witnesses" get you no place fast.

      Churchill once defined a fanatic as "one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." That's you two bozos. Instead of helping people out of the Novus Ordo, you have let personal hatred consume your pathetic lives and make up stories about clerics you don't like.
      As far as being a moron, I'm not a public school bureaucrat like Craig, and a screwball sidekick to "watch" him. No wonder education is so poor in this country! You say you know "all about" Introibo, yet you calumniated him by calling him a "cultist lackey", yet he has nothing to do with Dolan or SGG.

      As he said so well about you two in one of his posts: "Stupid lasts forever!"

    3. We have remarked before on how the defense of Dannie changed once we demonstrated that Cekada's defense of one-handed orders was trash.

      Note that years ago, Dannie & Co. never argued that his accusers had to overcome the presumption that the abp. used 2 hands. Instead, he and the Cheeseball argued that one-handed conferral was valid. Had they used Introibo's defense, they would have been confronted with a deafening chorus of witnesses to gainsay them.

      What you and Introibo are missing in this dispute is that you are not our audience, and hence you don't need to know the name of the eyewitnesses to the one-handed ordination that took place in June 1976. Our primary audience is Dannie himself, who knows the truth. We want him to seek conditional orders for the good of the people he controls. They keep him fat and happy, so at least he should reciprocate by providing sacraments untainted by the doubt the 9 priests raised in 1990 (one of them being Big Don Sanborn himself). Our secondary audience are the many people who put aside their doubts based on Tony Baloney's erroneous monograph. Our tertiary audience are those people who know that where there's smoke, there's fire. Nine priests can't have made it up out of whole cloth. It was never disputed in the society for so many years. And the one big defense that came out of Dannie's shop, Cheeseball's monograph, defended the validity of one-handed orders rather than demand proof that 2-handed orders didn't occur. That audience doesn't need to know the witnesses names to know that their testimony is accurate.

    4. So your "primary audience" is Dolan ? Do you really thinks he reads your blog? I just stumbled across it today and won't be back. Nor will he. As another commenter asked, Why not expose the false Novus Ordo religion?
      Many more souls to save. Since Dolan and his supporters will not read your weekly insults, either (a) change your focus to the NO or (b) release the names of the witnesses so as to destroy Dolan and prove he's in need of conditional orders.
      Otherwise, you're just a sad person with an axe to grind. Nuff said.

    5. But Dannie DOES read our blog (or somebody reads it for him). And he reacts to it, too. We don't need to release the names of the witnesses. Dolan knows what he should do. (BTW, we have many more statements than we've published.)

      Besides, our complete refutation and rebuttal of malformed Cheesy Cekada's monograph with it gross mistranslation of papal teaching is sufficient: He defended one-handed orders and his defense has been torn to shreds and all his shameful errors have been exposed exposed to ridicule.

      The fact that he defended one-handed orders rather than insist on demanding that his opponents overcome the presumption of correctly administered orders is a powerful argument in itself that the abp. goofed royally when he did Dannie. (Or did the abp. do it on purpose, on the basis of what he'd been told?)

  5. I'm sorry, but I can't even take your anonymous poster seriously. What adult ends their comments with "nuff said"?

    While I don't agree with the words used sometimes, I think many people do not realize the hypocrisy and evil of this trio. Is it not important to steer away people who are looking for the real Mass and have stumbled on this trio? Do those people not deserve to know the truth about these men?

    Maybe one of your blog writings can be about which mass centers you recommend.

    Btw: I am sure cekada reads your blog. Priests who have a preoccupation with themselves always will look up everything they can on themselves.

    1. Yes, people must be told over and over again about the rotten cult. To paraphrase one of former members of the evangelical cult recently in the news for killing a young man, when you're under a cult's influence you don't know you're breathing carbon dioxide until you get some oxygen (from last Saturday's NY Times).

      There are indeed many Mass centers that we recommend, but we hesitate to do so in public. If we did, the cult masters would launch a campaign against these good priests, just as happened in Florida after we had praised a chapel that competed with Big Don's. The good chapels we know don't want to engage in the wild disputes and polemics so characteristic of the SGG-Brooksville cabal; they simply want to serve the faithful by offering valid sacraments. Therefore they're at a disadvantage when these relentless street-fighters start making trouble with the faithful, with charges of invalidity, uncanonical orders etc. -- charges that apply equally to these trouble-making hypocrites. We will, however, make private recommendations.

      We are certain that Checkie has been a commenter on these pages, too.

  6. I agree with you, Anon 2:28AM, about Cekada. He thinks so much of himself that he is curious what people write about him - whether it's good, bad or indifferent makes no difference - it's still attention to HIM. That's the main thing. I'm sure he is anxious to know what next will be revealed about him. Wouldn't you just love to be someone at the Bishop's Lodge when those two are also there?

    1. Oh, brother, would we like to be there!

      In fact, some people have been toying with the idea of establishing a GO FUND ME account to raise money to hire a private detective to shadow those two when they're out in the desert Southwest on a (LOL) "pilgrimage.".

  7. Wrong, Pistrina. If one isn't sede, then "the privilege" of privileged altars no longer exists.

    If the See has been vacant and all of Paul VI's reforms invalid, then it still exists.

  8. Whatever the state of affairs, the sedes cannot have privileged altars.