Saturday, January 9, 2016

INHERITANCE INCORRUPTIBLE AND UNDEFILED

A son can bear with equanimity the loss of his father, but the loss of his inheritance may drive him to despair. Machiavelli

Today we post with the naïve trust of a child who seals a message in a bottle and casts the vessel adrift upon the ocean's currents in the hope of its reaching the eyes of a distant yet receptive spirit. Along with all TradWorld, we stand at the breaking dawn of a new year, a moment when the wise take stock, pledging to put their lives to better use in the service of their Creator and their fellow man. Like that sanguine child at the water's edge watching the shimmering bottle bob out of sight, Pistrina harbors every expectation that a like-minded soul, beach combing along a foreign strand on the luminiferous æther of cyberspace, will retrieve our missive and act.

The message is not directed to cultlings. It's aimed at the adult children of aging cult victims. Chances are our intended recipients do not, or at least no longer, belong to the SW Ohio-Brooksville cult. The odds are even better that they're sorely distressed at their parents' continued allegiance to the disreputable cult and its lucre-loving "clergy," who circle hungrily over seniors like jackal buzzards eyeing prospective carrion. Adding to their anxiety is the fear that the grandchildren will be left with nothing, while ruthless clerical buccaneers sail off to chic spa vacations or play ducks and drakes with a cash-strapped family's rightful inheritance (say, for instance, buying frivolous toys like used electronic organs that don't work).

So, what do you do? Are your hands tied? Do you and your children have to suffer because of your poor parents' unwise decision?

Absolutely not.

And if you start preparing, you'll be able to keep your family's treasure from ending up as priestly booty on the Island of Lost Boys, aka Tradistan. To help you educate yourself, here's a 6-step checklist:

⎕ Search online to learn the facts about breaking a will or probate.
There are many sites with loads of useful free information on contesting a will. You'll get great advice like the following from Teo Spengler on legalzoom to help you file an objection: "Evidence that someone unduly influenced the testator also invalidates the testament, but the influence must rise to a level negating the testator's free will. Usually when a will contestant charges undue influence, the testator was feeble and the person influencing them was in a position of strength or confidence..." (emphasis ours). Common sense suggests that claim will get the attention of a reasonable judge.
⎕ Get free legal advice
Very often local TV stations sponsor free call-in segments on their newscasts, and bar associations usually have a schedule of other community venues where you can obtain legal guidance without charge. (The Cincinnati Bar Association [513-381-8213] serves counties surrounding the cult center.) You'll learn what other options are available to stop the cult masters from further victimizing your family. Professionals working pro bono can also be helpful in advising you about securing power of attorney. The Information and Resources Center of the Council on Aging of Southwestern Ohio may also be able to assist you (513-721-1025), and you can get limited legal advice or referral to an elder-law attorney by contacting PRO Seniors, Inc. at 1-800-488-6070
⎕ Review your parents' will
Admittedly this is a delicate matter and may not be possible in all cases. But if you can, you'll be ahead of the game. Tact and love can go a long way here. If you learn that the cult is not a beneficiary in the will, then you'll be able to relax and save a lot of time and bother. On the other hand, if you do find out your parents have named as a beneficiary the cult or individual cult masters, you'll be able to engage legal counsel before it's too late. It's also important that you keep an open flow of communication with your parents to learn whether they're contemplating a bequest. Then you'll be able to persuade them not to do it. The web is full of eye-opening material about the cult to help you make your case.
⎕ Cancel any insurance policy naming the cult as beneficiary
Here's where free legal advice could really pay off. If your parents have bought a policy to benefit the cult, it's likely they still may be paying premiums. Canceling now will not only keep the proceeds out of the money-mad "clergy's" greedy hands, but it'll give your parents a few extra dollars for necessities. There might even be a cash value that can be restored to their savings. If the policy is already paid for, you might be able to change the beneficiary: there are plenty of reputable charities.
⎕ Find another chapel for your parents
The only way to put an end to your worries is to get your parents out of the cult masters' reach. That's probably no easy task, because they may really enjoy "the show." But it's the only way for you to have peace of mind. Identify another priest from a non-cult chapel, introduce your parents to him, and encourage them to attend his Mass, even if it isn't as showy as the cult's. It's probable that this man may have a genuine love of people and will quickly win your parents over. (But be careful you don't find yourself in the same predicament you just escaped: you must be very careful with all traddie priests until you're 100% sure they're OK. Talk to your parents after every contact with clergy.)
⎕ Keep cult "priests" out of the nursing home
If your parents are in a nursing home, and you have control of their affairs, give the home's administration a list of names of cult "priests" and instruct them to deny these particular "clergy" access to your parents. If they persist in attempting to visit, ask the police or another municipal authority what you can do to assure your parents remain unmolested. 
Once you read and act on this message, reseal it, as it were, and float it once again through cyberspace so another family can preserve its rightful legacy.


73 comments:

  1. Excellent advice.After a number of years we had much success of getting both our parents away from the Mount at Spokane and they now attend Immaculate Conception Church at Post Falls.The last straw that broke the camels back for them was the Father Kerfoot scandal.Our dad and mom then had success in drawing their friends away too.They were amazed at the sound training and advice of the SSPX priests who helped.

    In your past article's,various comments raised questions why certain sede "bishops" do not take any action with certain priests they have ordained who have scandalous behavour is because if they do,these priests will expose them too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're to be congratulated for getting your parents away from a traddie cult. It's a fine testimonial to what caring children can do.

      You're also right about the unholy nexus binding the cult bishops and their malformed "clergy." Both sides have a gun pointed to each other's head.

      Delete
  2. And this will only increase with the "Catholic" cemetery thst is being built.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That project poses a real threat to the estates of many traditional Catholic families. It will be a real money pit that will suck up many an estate. The children of traddies must also be vigilant that their parents don't turn over everything.

      Delete
  3. It's ridiculous to call the post-Schuckardt CMRI a cult. Their behavior is the exact opposite of a cult. Regarding the scandalous behaviour of some priests or nuns, that is nothing new to the Church, and does not prove that an organization is a cult.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We're not so sure. You may want to do some research into the characteristics of a cult.

      Delete
    2. I can assure you that I am familiar with the definition of the term. I am also familiar with the post-Schuckardt CMRI, amd I am confident that the group is not a cult. The onus always lies with the accuser so if there is any evidence to support the charge, I would be happy to see it. But just so you know, I am not going to accept hearsay and innuend. I would like real evidence against them, if it exists, otherwise I am quite certain of my assertion posted above.

      Delete
    3. A good case can be made that all these "bishop"-centered traddie groups display the social aspects of cult-like behavior: submission, exclusivity, persecution complex, control, isolation, love bombing, special knowledge, indoctrination, salvation, group think, cognitive dissonance, shunning, gender roles, and appearance standards.

      Delete
    4. I would like to see a case made that the post-Schuckarft CMRI, as opposed to the pre-Schuckardt CMRI falls into these categories. My experience with them, which has included a lot of observations and direct questioning of their priests has shown me that if anything they always fall to the side of non-authority, rather than pretending to be an authority.

      Delete
    5. Reader, almost all the aspects of cult-like behavior are either true about the Catholic Church itself or simply false.

      submission: Yep. Part of being a Catholic. Pray, pay and obey.
      exclusivity: There's one true Church.
      persecution complex: False.
      control: Again, see "submission" above.
      isolation: Not sure what you mean with this, but Catholics are warned to avoid heretics and those who are a danger to faith and morals.
      love bombing: Absolutely no idea what this is.
      special knowledge: Part of any human institution.
      indoctrination: Ever heard of the phrase "Catholic DOCTRINE"?
      salvation: Seriously?
      group think: Human nature.
      cognitive dissonance: No idea what you mean by this.
      shunning: Human nature. People naturally shun those who have opposing views, just as you shun and attack the people at SGG.
      gender roles: Teaching of the Church.
      appearance standards: False.

      Delete
    6. We thought you implied you were familiar with the characteristics of a cult. (I.e., if you're "Gene.")

      All these sociological terms have very specific definitions in the specialized literature about cults, and your reply shows that you're a stranger to this body of knowledge.

      We won't waste time operationalizing them for you. However, we will point out that these Catholic sects are not the Church, and their leaders have no authority or jurisdiction. Therefore, nothing that insulates the Church against the charge of being a cult can be employed in the defense of the malformed sectarians.

      Delete
    7. I am familiar with the characteristics of a cult, as I said above. I will also say that all of these traditional groups, bishops and priests are not in any part of the hierarchy of the Church. This is a separate matter as to whether these groups are a cult, but the two points do intertwine from what I have seen.

      Delete
    8. Would you also agree with us that these "bishop"-centered, sectarian civil corporations participate only in a limited manner in the spiritual benefits of the Catholic Church, even if their clergy possess valid orders?

      Delete
    9. Yes, of course is it limited. Their only role is to provide the sacraments to lay people that request the sacraments from them, which is the only licit way it can be done in our situation.

      Delete
    10. Excellent.

      But why is it that these "bishops" pretend otherwise, as they don't make it plain that they're not much better than Eastern schismatics?

      Delete
    11. Gene is certainly well informed that what little liceity these extra-legal clergy possess derives from the laity's demand for the sacraments. Outside the provision of the aforesaid, they have no brief, and, in fact, they are wholly subservient to the people, whose will alone allows them to perform their priestly functions without incurring divine wrath. Pretending as though they are the "Church in exile" is an affront to the faith.

      Delete
    12. I am anonymous 5:19 (not Gene).

      So you read a book by an atheistic Jewish psychiatrist that tells you whether the Catholic Church is a "cult".

      Fine, if that's how you want to nourish your faith.

      https://media.giphy.com/media/hjFpbTYINnp9m/giphy.gif

      Delete
    13. We never referred to the Catholic Church as a cult. We were always taking about these nutty "bishop"-centered sects that have sprung up in the on-going ecclesial crisis.

      Dannie, the Pivster, and Big Don are NOT the Catholic Church.

      Delete
    14. What exactly does it mean to say that someone is or isn't the Catholic Church? If those people mentioned "are NOT the Catholic Church" (and I'm not saying they are) then who is?

      Delete
    15. The Catholic Church is composed of the Shepherds and the sheep, otherwise known as the hierachy and the laity.

      Delete
    16. Yes, Gene. This is true. I was challenging the "Reader"'s mantra that Bp. So-and-so "is not the Catholic Church". It's a meaningless statement.

      Delete
  4. Didn't an ex-CMRI nun write a book about her experience? I haven't yet gotten around to ordering it & read it. Have, you, Gene? I would think that her account would be worthwhile reading for starters.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is interesting that you write "bishop-centered" in your reply. I find this to be very true. The bishops tend to have no accountability, and appear to be worshipped by the congregation. The parishioners have almost declared these men saints, and some cases the parishioners have actually said these men will be saints.

    Another thing I have noticed is everyone wanting to have an "in" with the main families (aka big contributors.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The cultings' irreverent "canonization" of their masters shows just how far these groups have strayed from true Catholic thinking. The members' confirmation bias in the face of so much evidence to the contrary is another sign of these groups' disordered spiritual life. They're blind not to see that these "bishops" are accountable only to their moneyed backers. These foolish people are lost, but it's important that others recognize this is not authentic Catholic life.

      Delete
    2. Excellent comments Reader.These blind people are very foolish and must have a disordered spiritual life.Lets pray for them.

      Delete
    3. And let's pray they stop giving money to these repulsive "bishops." Dry up the cash flow, and these bums will disappear.

      Delete
  6. CMRI is a joke.They hold up Pius XII like a Saint and tell their congregations he should be canonized.(paraphrasing)
    Pius XII from 1951-1958 destroyed some of the oldest traditions of the Roman rite.I can prove it yet these morons nod and agree with everything their clerics tell them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they were capable of thought and reason, they would never have stayed.

      Delete
    2. Because they treat papal laws as good Catholics do, not the way dissidents do.

      Delete
    3. We seriously doubt these people -- or their clergy -- know papal laws. If their clergy were such staunch defenders, why haven't they publicly condemned Checkie's perverse mistranslation of infallible papal teaching?

      Delete
    4. Or maybe they stay so they can receive the Sacraments to keep their souls in sanctifying grace so they can go to heaven.

      Delete
    5. Yes,CMRI is a joke.It is very interesting to note that the two new chapels on the east coast have very few young people and would say within five years will be closed.We have been around most of the CMRI chapels and the young are leaving.

      Delete
    6. You have been around most of the CMRI chapels? They have dozens of them spread all across America, and you've really been to most of them?

      Delete
    7. Your first mistake is to assume that they are clergy. The second mistake is to assume that they have an obligation to condemn others.

      Delete
    8. Condemnation and celebrating the destruction of the oldest traditions in the church (post 1955 holy week,3 hour communion fast) as a precursor to the novus ordo are 2 different actions.

      Delete
  7. Have you seen where Fellay is headed? Wonder who Frannie will appoint SSPX bishop after him. But as long as you get your sacraments... just step up and put out your hand, right, Reader? I mean you deserve some Jesus Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity, don't you? It's your right that you be accepted as you are--and Frannie wants to accommodate you! Sounds like he's your pope. Not sure why you're even waitin for SSPX...

    http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2016/01/bp-fellay-talks-about-proposed.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It sounds as if somebody is off his meds.

      Delete
    2. The SSPX will be utterly destroyed once they are fully incorporated into the novus ordo.
      They will have novus ordo bishop's ordaining priest's like the FSSP/ICKSP.

      Delete
    3. Is that much worse than "One-Hand" Dan's "ordinations"?

      Delete
    4. He doesn't concern me.I don't know him nor had any contact with him.Secondly from what I have read his ordination would suffice if what you say is true.The "Letter" about his ordination was signed by a guy who wasn't present during ceremony and was a teenager at the time.
      I am not on his side nor do I care,that's just my personal opinion.Again he doesn't concern me as I don't know him.

      Delete
    5. You don't have all the facts straight. The 1990 letter was signed by more than one "guy." Nine (9) priests signed it, several of them contemporaries of "One-Hand" Dan. Moreover, one of the signatories was loud-mouth Big Don Sanborn himself, the intellectual powerhouse of the cult. But most importantly, eye witnesses have come forward to affirm that not only was one hand used, but that it only happened to despised Wee Dan.

      Everybody in the SSPX knew what had happened. It was part of organizational history. They only kept quiet then to preserve the archbishop's reputation.

      Don't be hoodwinked by the hocus-pocus of cult apologists. No one knows whether a one-handed ordination "would suffice." Whether you know the Dirtbag or not, you should be concerned about doubtfully valid orders if you want to throw stones at the SSPX.

      Delete
    6. "But most importantly, eye witnesses have come forward"

      No eyewitnesses have come forward.

      Delete
    7. Yes, they have.

      Just because, out of prudence, their names have not been made public, doesn't mean eyewitnesses have not given their testimony.

      We assure everyone they have.

      Maybe you don't want to take us at our word, despite the fact that everything we have revealed is the truth. That's fine. But then don't take the gainsayers' word either that there are no eyewitness accounts.

      The plain and simple fact is THERE ARE these accounts. And everyone who is intimately involved in this contretemps knows it. And we mean EVERY ONE, including you-know-who.

      Delete
    8. Maybe we disagree on the meaning of the phrase to "come forward". That usually means someone has stated something publicly, which is how I am using it here. That has never happened.

      As far as your claim that someone has made some private statement to someone, that is a hoax.

      Delete
    9. No hoax. Unassailable fact. And it's more than some ONE. There are at least two eyewitnesses who have given their account to several people.

      The people who really count in this dispute know the reports are true.

      Delete
    10. Hmm. How strange. I seem to be assailing this "unassailable fact" fairly easily.

      There are no eyewitnesses.

      Delete
  8. Yes,Gene should buy that ex-cmri nuns book.It gives much detail and explains this woman and another sister went to Bp P about major problems,etc and he did nothing(made the claim his hands were tied.Between 1986-2000 over 50 nuns left.

    Pistrina,do you accept our view that the "vows" that the cmri sisters take are only private and would have to be judged by true Church Authority.

    Yes,we would have to agree,there are few young people at most of the cmri chapels.Where are the vocations.Most of the young men who go to Omaha leave.Certain priests ordained by Bp P conduct themselves in a bad way and nothing is said or done.There is something very wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We absolutely agree that the vows of these so-called "sisters" are NOT the public (religious) vows of nuns in the real Church. For one reason, there is no lawful ecclesiastical superior to accept them in the name of God. Furthermore, even if these cult "nuns" make a vow publicly, it does not create any juridical effects in the public and social life of the Church.

      The whole thing is a dog and pony show, in all the traddie cults.

      Delete
    2. I already own the book, and I have skimmed it, and will read it more carefully when I have time. The book deals with the Schuckardt era, which I am not in any way defending,

      Delete
  9. Yes,I would have to agree.A good friend of ours spend time in the mount "convent" but left due to the major problems that were going on.She said herself the "vows" that the cmri sisters take are null and void.The cmri has never had any lawful ecclesiastical superior approval.To the scandal of Father Louis and one of the "sisters"it was common knowledge even among certain lay faithful.Bp P knew and did nothing.

    You should also note that the young are voting with their feet and leaving the cmri chapels.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Session 7 Canon 13 Council of Trent forbids ANY change to liturgy.Pius XII DESTROYED the Roman Rite between 1951-1958.He even changed the immemorial midnight fast for Holy Communion to a mere 3 hour's!!!!
      THE CMRI treat him like a Saint and obey every one of his heretical changes.
      The CMRI is a cancer and obviously don't know their theology.
      The mass of the presanctified on Good Friday was the oldest tradition in the Roman Rite.It was the same every century until 1955 & Pius XII.His 1951 changes to the Easter Vigil was the official first act of the novus ordo counter church.

      Delete
    2. We hope the young in all the traddie cult chapels vote with their feet.

      Delete
    3. Pius XII used his power given to him by God to make changes to the rites. To say otherwise is grave disobedience and schism.

      Delete
    4. Pius XII,according to Council of Trent,in condemned.

      Delete
    5. By saying this, you are cut off from the body of the Church. Pray that God gives you the grace to find your way back to the ark of salvation.

      Delete
    6. Pius XII according to Council of Trent is condemned.1951-1958 Pius XII lost his office due to Session 7 Canon 13 Council of Trent.You and your ilk who defend Pius XII recognize & resist Pius XII.You all are no different than the SSPX you so bodly condemn.

      Delete
  10. I stand by what I stated about Pius XII.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I disagree 100%.I stand by the council of Trent not the novus ordo,which is exactly what the changes from 1951-1958 are,end of story.Have a lovely day.

    ReplyDelete
  12. You stand by your private interpretation of Trent and you clearly reject the teaching of the Church on the powers Roman Pontiff. As I said, you stand in schism by rejecting the laws of the Church as approved by Pope Pius XII.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Session 7 canon 13 forbids ANY change under penalty of anathema.Absolutely no private interpretation here,Sir.Have a blessed week,Sir.

      Delete
    2. Pope Innocent III: “If a future pope was to change all the rites of the sacraments, he would put himself outside the Church.” Reiterated by at the Council of Florence Eugene IV held the same; the same was made Dogma at Trent: If anyone (whosoever – including the Pope) was to say that the Traditionally handed down Rites…can be changed or shortened…may he be cursed…” Pacelli was and remains ‘outside the Church’

      Delete
    3. Popes can change disciplinary laws. Pope Pius XII was not bound by Trent. That is an old traditionalist canard.

      If you deny the power of the Supreme Pontiffs to change disciplinary/liturgical laws you are professing heresy.

      Delete
    4. It's faith he changed not a discipline.Holy week is the most solemn time in the Catholic Church. The ceremonies and masses were the oldest traditions in the Catholic church.Ceremonies going back to the 1st & 2nd centuries.The after midnight immemorial fast changed to 3 hours.They were implemented under the guise of being "experimental".The Holy Ghost does not "experiment".Secondly the council of Trent,council of Florenc,and numerous Pope's FORBADE ANY CHANGE TO THE LITURGY AND FAITH.
      When the Jesuits were suppressed it was a discipline.Destroying the oldest traditions of faith,with previous councils teaching any changes results in being damned,is heresy.I will not respond to any more comments.Everything I have stated is fact based and true.Have a blessed week.

      Delete
    5. It is within the power of the Supreme Pontiff to make changes as he sees fit to the sacred rites of the Church. To reject or attack his laws is to attack the Church as the Pope is the head of the Church and his authority comes from God Himself. I urge you to repent and beg for God forgiveness for your schismatic and heretical ideas.

      Delete
  13. A traddieland priest denied me absolution in confession because I would not say "I promise I will never sin again"...This happened to me very recently.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Which group of priest? Certain priests are known for denial of absolution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Priest not related to any group.I get it if someone isn't sorry for their sins.
      To ask me to promise not to sin anymore is wrong.I am not perfect,I am not G-d nor angelic.I'm a fallen man with imperfect nature who needs our Lord Jesus Christ.
      I ask in all seriousness,am I wrong for thinking this way?Should I have said "I promise to not sin anymore"?

      Delete
  15. You could have said, " By and with the grace of God I promise to try to sin no more." That's all a human can do. So he was an independent priest?

    ReplyDelete
  16. In order to be absolved I had to say "I promise i will not sin anymore"
    Yes,independent but with an old,basically,dying bishop as his superior.It wouldn't do good to call his bishop.he is old,sick,hundreds of miles away.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If this jerk is a sede, he has no superior.

      Delete
  17. Take this as a sign from God to never darken that church's door ever again!!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Thank you for the responses.This breaks my heart,we loved attending mass at this particular church.

    ReplyDelete