Saturday, November 14, 2015


Dark grows the valley, more and more forgetting:/So it were with me if forgetting could be willed./Tell the grassy hollow that holds the bubbling well-spring./Tell it to forget the source that keeps it filled. Meredith

Last week, we read, with more than a little interest, a recent notice of underwriting opportunities at Angelus Press. One of the production projects for which the SSPX is soliciting support is A Short Critical Study of the New Order of the Mass, commonly known as "The Ottaviani Intervention." Our wish is that Santa, or at least some generous soul, will step forward with the $2,500 requested:  Traditional Catholics who don't read Italian or French are in need of a reliable, definitive English translation of this "classic critique of the New Mass."

Five years ago we lamented that the only readily available English version appeared to be that of Erroneous Antonius Cekada. In our devastating review of his troubled effort (click here), we exposed many of the same linguistic and stylistic shortcomings we found in his appallingly incompetent Work of Human Hands. At the conclusion our analysis of his shoddy rendering, we concluded:

All in all, he’s an unlucky and ungifted dilettante, whose every effort to appear learned blows up in his face. His lot is to entertain pretensions that will forever outpace his limited ability to perform.
Since that time, we've brought to light many, many more of the Checkmeister's deficiencies as a "scholar" (LOL). None, however, was more damning than our exposure of his perverse translation of an infallible teaching of Pope Pius XII. (See, for instance, our posts of May 11 and May 18, 2013, as well as our rebuttal/refutation of his flawed defense of one-handed orders, starting at article VI.) This catastrophic blunder is of a kind so far-reaching in its consequences that, once made, the perpetrator can never recover from it: The ensuing universal loss of confidence creates a permanent and irremediable disability.*  

In our personal and professional lives, all of us have lost faith forever in someone who spectacularly bungled something. Perhaps it was the heedless neighbor who squandered the family nest-egg on a dumb investment notwithstanding his wife's tearful protests and sound advice to the contrary; or maybe the boss whose mismanagement resulted in the collapse of a department; or possibly the classmate whose wildly misinformed guesses landed you in the principal's office for an expulsion hearing.

The world at large, too, abounds with many more examples of royal botchesIn governmental affairs, think of George Tenet, "Baby" Bush's hapless CIA chief, who insisted that the evidence of WMDs in Iraq was a "slam dunk case." History will remember him -- and his boss -- with deep contempt. More obscurely, in the area of university scholarship, we have the case of poor old Prof. Tom Burns Haber. He never really regained his reputation after the brilliant critic John Sparrow exposed his incompetence as a text editor and as a writer of plain English. Many years after the exposure appeared in the Times Literary Supplement, this genteel, soft-spoken academic's pupils, who loved him for his kindness and decency, would still whisper about "that problem he had."

And so it is with Checkie Cheeseball, the Blunderer par excellence. Had he corrected his perverse translation after he was cautioned in charity, all his other howling mistranslations would have been forgotten by now. He could have continued his painful masquerade as a "gifted scholar and theologian." The errors, egregious as they may be, could have been blamed on "editorial oversight" or put down to haste, the unfortunate byproduct of a busy life laboring in the Lord's vineyard. In other words, Tony Baloney could still be basking in the (misguided) admiration of his fellow clergy, both inside and outside Tradilandia.

Now, however, as a result of that fatally perverse translation, he can never again feel the radiant warmth of TradWorld's begrudging esteem, or the hot-air hype blowing hard from the bleak spiritual desert called Tradistan. To be sure, the debased, degenerate cultlings still believe all the bunkum put out in Dannie's grubby "Bishop's (?) Corner." But let's be frank. The Cheeseball himself discounts the high opinion of illiterate though fawning culties. They're only worth his scant attention if they obey Dannie and buy his worthless WHH. Without 'em, he'd have no sales.

Brassy as he is, Awkward Anthony secretly fears that his fellow "professors" and the pesthouse "seminarians" laugh up their sleeves at him.  Their smirking reserve and behind-his-back giggles must sting more fiercely than the cat-o'- ninetails of a boatswain's mate. One of those "colleagues," Squirmin' Herman, a South American and hence the privileged beneficiary of good schooling who once studied classics at the university level, will understand better than the rector the enormity of Checkie's blunder. Hermie and the distempered, tightly-wrapped Scut the Prefect -- both ordained by Big Don, not by "One Hand" -- must roll their eyes every time the Blunderer shows up cracking wise and searching pathetically for their deference.

Other priests mock him, too, especially those from rival Traddie sects that once dreaded his smarmy pen. Today the former objects of Tony's hauteur snicker wickedly when anyone mentions the Cheeseburger's "scholarly credentials." You can get away with a lot in Sedelandia, but you can't save face after perversely mistranslating infallible papal teaching. Trad Nation won't let you forget.

It's a certain bet that the SSPX hasn't forgotten either. Although the severely challenged Blunderer has never once ruffled the society with his sub-adolescent name-calling, the SSPX remembers his ugly exit. It remembers what he wrote, too. It remembers the lawsuits. So now that Bonehead Tone's unforgettable and unforgivable blunder has been paraded before a sneeringly scornful traditional-Catholic community, the society is poised to issue a new, trustworthy version of "The Ottaviani Intervention." Their translation will drive his sorry effort off the bookshelves of everyone except the incurably depraved.  Say what you will about the SSPX, but they've got the people with the training and education to make an accurate translation and render it into readable, edited English prose.

Today the Checkster's voice is but a fading memory in the minds of the properly educated, who'll simply recall a cautionary tale of trust misplaced in a rank amateur.  You low-class Gertie rite trash, whose money underwrites Checkie's "scholarly" misadventures, can write him off, too. He's not the Sage of Southwest Ohio. Soon you, too, will have a dependable translation of the "Intervention." So go ahead, y'all: Give your cult-kicked backsides a break from those rough corn cobs: Consign Cheesey's pulp fiction to the outhouse, where it will, at last, be of some practical use.  

If anyone out there in cyberspace has a few extra dollars, he can help erase all remembrance of Checkie's whole unreliable oeuvre by calling Mr. James Vogel at Angelus Press (785-321-3615) and offering to underwrite the new "Ottaviani Intervention." This time you'll know your money was well spent.

*For that reason alone, you can be certain the Angelus Press would never simply re-print Checkie Cheese's mess.


  1. Why doesn't +fellay (or James Vogel) ask Pope Francis since they're "una cum" him? I mean really if SSPX hasn't published a translation of Ottaviani Intervention in almost 50 years that ought to tell you something, I wonder how much cheeseburger (as you call him) rec'd for his work -- not that I'm defending him on the charges you all make concerning parish and school. I'm just saying don't make the same mistake twice.

    1. We imagine Cheesy reaps the profits from the book sales, which Dannie aggressively promotes all the time. Maybe the SSPX has heard so many complaints about the Cheeseball's bad translation that they felt it necessary to get something accurate out there. (Owing to space limitations, our review only highlighted a few failures.) Who knows? What counts is that Catholics will finally have something reliable. Una cum or not, they're several orders of magnitude better educated than the malformed cult dim wits. None of Checkie's work is trustworthy, and no traditional Catholic should pay him any attention at all.

    2. "None of Checkie's work is trustworthy, and no traditional Catholic should pay him any attention at all."

      If he weren't like he is, that is, if he had always been a faithful priest and never done any of the bad things he's done, I bet you wouldn't say this.

      I bet you say that because you were one of his victims.

    3. If a good priest had made all those horrendous scholarly errors, we would have first counseled him confidentially. But a good priest would be intellectually, honest and would have seen his errors and remedied them immediately. Therefore we would not have needed to go public and expose him, for his errors would never have seen the light of publication.

      We should add here that a good, intellectually honest, well-formed priest would never have published anything until it had been reviewed by competent, educated people. Anybody, priest or layman, who has attended a real institution of higher learning and absorbed age-old scholarly values knows that you never publish until your work has been critiqued by people with genuine expertise.

      In Checkie's case, he just goes ahead and publishes. Anyone who does read over his crap is just as clueless as he, so he has no hope of getting it right. And when he does receive sound criticism, he ignores it or doubles down and defends the indefensible.

      We were never one of his "victims:" we were blessed with the discernment to see who he really was before we could be victimized.

  2. Surely you know that Cheeseburger WAS educated by SSPX and ordained by Lefebvre (so was Sanborn and Dolan)--so it's actually already an SSPX translation.

    SSPX also has its scandals:

    Why did you go to SSPX vs SSPV? I know you are many people and it seems like one of you (at least) knew Cheese b4 he was SSPX. Is that why you went w/CD vs SSPV? Or did you only fall under the sway of CD after the split? Do you have knowledge of what caused the split - I believe on your site you have stated that Dolan was expelled. Was it for fomenting sedition amongst the priests of the society, for moral turpitude, or did he leave on his own steam mainly due to ego/ disagreements (i.e. wanting to be ordained bishop to pass on priesthood)?

    I am so sorry for the damage that has been done to your families and especially your children.

    1. Yes, we know the Cheeserton was at Écône for a while, but really not long enough to be truly considered to be truly educated by the SSPX. Besides, in those early days, the abp. wasn't too picky, especially with Americans. He was trying to grow an organization.

      We're also aware of the SSPX's problems. Our only point here is that their priests are superior intellectually and academically to these malformed cult sacks of pus.

      Yes, we have the FULL story in all its details about the split from the SSPV, and one day we intend to post it in its entirety once we have our informants' permission. (The details we have would either reveal the identities who gave us the info or it would embarrass our informants who should have spoken up sooner.) However, until then, if you want to know, we suggest you become acquainted with some of the clergy who were around at the time of the split. They'll tell you Kelly's motives.

      We strongly doubt that Dannie's chief reason for seeking the episcopacy was to pass on the priesthood, or else he would have gotten himself fixed before his "consecration." One day the whole ugly story of the rivalry between Kelly and Dannie will come out, we guarantee it. It's neither edifying nor wholesome.

      We thank you for your caring words, but really C& D caused no real damage to any of us here, outside of profound disappointment. We're old timers, you see. Yes, we all attended one or another of their chapels, and, yes, in the beginning we thought they just might be genuine. But it didn't take long to see behind the false fronts once you got to know them and once you got to know the priests who knew them way back when. After that, we all independently concluded that something definitely wasn't quite right, so we adjusted our expectations and our donations.

      A few of us tried to give them the benefit of the doubt, taking into consideration the times, but others formed their judgment more quickly. And we even had heated discussions among ourselves. All stayed, however, until 2009, when our consciences would not allow us to continue even with the minimal cooperation to which some of had become accustomed. Others, who had tried to support them tip the bitter end, came away chastened by the experience, and they remain the fiercest opponents of the Dynamic Duo.

  3. P.S. Just because SSPX educated doesn't mean can't make mistakes and agree w/you should admit & correct mistakes and welcome peer review. Think probably all of them are a little too impressed w/their own intelligence (cleverness) and their own mutual appreciation society probably not good for them. Also think they have become locked into their positions and really can't get out of it now (i.e. have already ordained priests). It seems C&D are morally compromised as well (blackmail). Sad story all around.

    1. Hear! Hear! You understand the problem perfectly. And you're right: They may be clever, in a low way, but they really don't have the right stuff

  4. Novus Ordo Watch again just posted Big Don's 3 hour "expert analysis" of the Vatican 2 documents, as they called it. What do you think of this 3 hour thing?

    1. We haven't seen it yet. We'll post our observations on this comments page after we look at it this weekend.

      As a rule, we are never impressed with the Donster's analyses: they're usually very superficial and the insights are far from "expert.". But we don't want to prejudge. As soon as we get the time to binge on his B.S., we'll get back.

      Thanks for the tip!

    2. They're actually selling the transcript which amounts to 70 pages according to NOW.

    3. Good grief!

      We don't quite understand why NOW gives that gas bag so much space. Maybe it serves their editorial purposes.

    4. O my! The Donster disgraced himself a while back in front of his own cult audience (a "Heimspiel", as we'd say on my side of the world) in a "debate" with Robert Fastiggi. But it seems they are actually that delusional, they imagine themselves Big Don to be the (big) victor.
      Well, and to the victor the spoils!

      And here is the video.

    5. And if you don't want to listen to all of it - I'd certainly wouldn't recommend it, you'd probably lose a lot more brain cells than from a general anaesthesia - jump to 1:48:00. It just takes one minute to get the gist of Donald's so called "expertise".

    6. Tarquinius is right. Big Don's performance is an embarrassment. Luckily there's much better material on NOW from individuals with real expertise and an ability to communicate it.

      After our mind-numbing experience listening to his nasal drone, it's no wonder that the "priests" who complete his sorry excuse for a "seminary" are so badly prepared. The rector wastes so much time with these interminable discourses and interviews that he has very little to devote to teaching, supervision, evaluation, and much needed self-improvement.
      Seeing that better educated men have already passed along the same way and left a real contribution, the time he fritters away on projects like this for which he has no aptitude and to which he can contribute very little should be dedicated to improving teaching and learning at the pesthouse. For instance, he could have used the those interminable hours to coach some of those "professors" who think that instruction consists in reading from the text book out loud during class time.

      No one else should endure this verbal water-boarding, nor should anyone waste his money on the 70-page transcript. Sedes should put their time and resources to better use by listening to one of the many more reliable spokesmen for their cause.

    7. I saw that debate and I have to say I felt embarrassed. Even though I'm a sedevacantist I don't think Sanborn did a good job in it. At one point he was even getting emotional and seemed as if he was going to cry. The way it went down, I would give the edge to Fastiggi.

      I can't understand how NOW touts this debate as a masterclass by Sanborn when it isn't.

    8. We agree with you. Both men did not acquit themselves well, but Sanborn's performance at 1:48.00, which Tarquinius referenced, is really substandard. All those emotion-laden rhetorical questions instead of a reasoned response played well to the partisan audience, but fell flat before better schooled viewers. An audience of university-trained seeds would have booed him for his flagrantly down market response.

      We, too, are puzzled at NOW's posture. They're got some very smart people there who must realize that Sanborn acquitted himself like a schoolboy in that debate.

  5. And they're selling the thing for a whopping $25!

    You can get several exceptional Catholic BOOKS with that!

    This is what they said:

    "In addition to this highly-informative audio broadcast, in which Bp. Sanborn explains the Catholic doctrine and Vatican II’s opposing Modernist errors using exceptional clarity and easy-to-understand language, Restoration Radio is now also making available a transcript of the entire program.

    While the transcript is not free of charge, True Restoration has kindly agreed to provide the transcript to anyone who makes a $25.00 (USD) donation to Novus Ordo Watch, its show sponsor.

    The transcript is 75 pages in length and not available to the general public until January 1, 2016 (and then, too, it won’t be free). If you are already an annual member with True Restoration, the transcript is available to you right now and without any further charge. However, if you are not an annual member, right now the only way to obtain the transcript is to make a donation of only $25.00 (USD)."

    1. Why didn't RR just make the transcript free via PDF if the content were so exceptionally clear, and just ask downloaders to consider a donation to NOW?

      We fear that if someone smart reads the transcript, he'll see it for the worthless crap it is, and hold NOW responsible. NOW is too important a voice to risk losing its "cred" over Sanborn's rubbish and RR's brown nosing the cult masters.

    2. My guess is that NOW "sees the big picture" or that they see the cult masters as a "necessary evil"; people they would never associate with but would actually denounce if things were different. They don't agree with Checkie on Schiavo for instance. They made this clear in one of the shows they did which touched on related things by putting a disclaimer at the beginning saying that they don't all neccesarily agree with what will be said (hahaha).

      But none of this is any excuse. They should denounce the cult masters just as they denounce the Novus Ordo.

    3. NOW has so much going for it that it could easily denounce Checkie and disassociate itself from that blowhard Big Don. We know that in Europe and in places in South America, they are the "go to guys" for reliable information. Keeping Big Don in their stable seems like a HUGE misstep in editorial policy. NOBODY, except vlid cultists, respects the rector.

      Maybe these guys just don't realize how superior they are to the SGG-Brooksville cult. To keep their credibility, they should purge their site of every vestige of the Cheeseball, Big Don, and Wee Dannie Dosan. The appearance of those scumbags' names only serves to discredit NOW in the eyes of right-reasoning Catholics.

    4. Yes indeed. They need to send them packing. Let's hope some day they do.

      Have you ever personally spoken with Derksen or any of the other people who run NOW?

    5. One of us has spoken with people associated with NOW, and tells us they are smart folks, who certainly know about Sanborn. He said that back in 2009, one of the NOW people put Big Don in his place in a stern reply that stunned the Donster. In fairness to NOW, we suspect that they feature Sanborn because he embraces the same cause as they. They should wash their hands of him.

  6. Where do you get the idea that lay people owning churches and hiring clergy (like protestants) is Catholic? Also I think you are (more than) a bit naive to think that SSPX clergy educated in Europe and/or Latin America are somehow more scholarly and/or highly educated than U.S. or Canada SSPX-educated clergy. On an individual basis it could be true; but on the whole I doubt it. I have seen videos of the Neo SSPX clergy and they don't impress me in the least. Also I don't know how you have managed to miss all the people complaining about being denied sacraments or being kicked out of SSPX chapels (not to mention the double standard for rich people).

    Actually for a trad Catholic you don't seem to know much about the pre-VC2 church. My mother told me years ago when she signed me up at my local n.o. parish that if I wasn't signed up, they wouldn't bury me. And when I was praying in front of an abortion clinic one of the pro-abort escorts actually gave as one of his reasons for being there was that the Church denied his father burial because he wasn't registered at any parish. I also read w/interest all the nuns (like T of Avila) who complained about the priest denying her communion as freq as she wanted it and giving her small hosts (like I don't know what difference it made to her the size of the host). See para 19

    But also the Little Flower had to get her confessor's permission before receiving communion.

    Also if you think flip flops, painted toe nails, piercings etc. were allowed in any Temple but Herod's think you are engaging in another protestant double standard: how I dress at church vs how I dress in my private/regular life (as if God allows such a separation). Think you may have many of the same problems that drive you batty in the unholy trinity.

    Your expertise in Latin (and your intelligence and/or debating skills etc) is a God-given gift and I don't know that He will commend you at your judgment for using it as a club to beat and/or denigrate other people. W/out charity you are just noise.

    Why don't you publish your own works or offer your services rather than spending all your time criticizing them. Bible says overcome evil w/good and keep your mind on things above. I think it is good to publish the truth about financial, sexual etc. abuse, but for the rest I would let it go. Seriously, you could end up in hell.

  7. We have no illusions about the problems in the SSPX. Howevver, we can tell you from first-hand experience, that the European, and especially the Latin American ,clergy are far, far better educated that the Americans -- sede, SSPX, or FSSP. You have only seen videos. We know these men personally. Even the amateurs among them, when compared to the sede "lights," look like prodigies of scholarship. Believe us, if we could somehow wave a magic wand and allow you to meet the men we know, you would retract your statements immediately. These guys know what they're doing. Especially the South Americans. We know it's hard for us Americans to admit, but those countries are blessed with a venerable Catholic intellectual tradition and a genuine love for learning and culture. In every way they are superior to us crass gringos (us included) with respect to general culture and intimate knowledge of the faith. It's a fact.

    As for the restrictions and sanctions of the past, there is no comparison to what goes on today, In those days, when there was a Church visible and a legitimate hierarchy existed, they had every right to impose conditions in accordance with the positive and divine law of the Church. In the sede vacante, those lawless scuzz bags can exact nothing at all. Illegitimate themselves, they can neither assume judicial authority nor exact punishments.

  8. I am not saying any names.Our priest (sedevacantist) told me to stay away from Dolan & Sanborn.He said Fr.Cekada isn't bad but hangs around a bad lot.He gave me a few examples but not saying here what he told me.Honestly,I have no ill will towards any of these clerics.The entire situation nowadays is sad and we are better off praying and doing our best to avoid gossip.I wish everyone on this blog the best in the future.

  9. This is Anonymous 4:46 AM.I want to clarify what our priest told me about Bishops Dolan & Sanborn were doctrinal issues,nothing personal or perverse.

    1. Understood. We would have to respectfully disagree with his opinion on the Checkmeister, though. He is an enabler of both Dannie and Big Don, and he is definitely not the "scholar" he pretends to be, as we have demonstrated on these pages. But we're certain your priest has good, personal reasons for his favorable opinion. We simply have numerous stories of our own to convince us of our opinion. Anyway, Checkie is not really the problem. He's really pathetically insignificant, and without the support of the cult masters he'd be out on his tail. Your priest showed genuine insight into the problem when he told you to stay away from the "bishops."

      Thanks for the good wishes above. You're fortunate to be with one of the many good and decent sede priests who stay away from cultism.