The signs are unmistakable. They’re as plain as day. Simply open your eyes.
Despite the petulantly brave face “One-Hand Dan” summons with difficulty in his weekly “Bishop’s (?) Corner,” the SW Ohio magus must assuredly envisage the cult's accelerating material, emotional, and financial disintegration. That's why he subjects us to these endless talk-therapy sessions.
For instance, back on January 10, Wee Dan, with his wonted beggar’s candor, whined:
We have both mice and a broken stove in the Helfta Hall Kitchen. They will both have to go, I hope in time for Lent, with its church suppers.
The chief objective of this stomach-turning admission might have been to loosen up some cash from queasy Gerties fearful of competing with rodents for cold scraps during the starch-and-grease-fueled feeding-frenzy that SGG calls Lent. However, Panhandlin' Dan's words betray much more than his own anxiety to secure free, hot, high-calorie chow for himself and his ravenous dependents. By His Esuriency's own account, we'd say the cult center is teetering on the verge of condemnation.
It’s not a pretty picture. Deadly optics, in fact.
Either the mice have decamped from the “Young Fathers’” flophouse to occupy the kitchen of the social hall, or the pesky creatures have sent out a stalwart vanguard to establish a new colony. We’d say the first is the more likely scenario, since vermin go where the food is. That's probably why the Gerties must now contend with a new sanitation threat to Dannie’s dump.
As if the uncontrollable raccoon infestation weren't enough for them to bear!
As if the uncontrollable raccoon infestation weren't enough for them to bear!
The cult’s barren, industrial-park site will soon present to the squalor-besieged cultlings' horrified gaze a stark, apocalyptic landscape of crumbling piles, rusting appliances, and disease-carrying varmints run amok. We think Deacon Dan, in his mind’s eye, can envision the looming desolation more clearly than anyone else (except for Pistrina, that is). He recognizes the same old wolf growling and pawing at the rickety front door. As acute panic sets in, he grasps at the only solution his weak imagination has ever conceived: Squeeze the already bug-eyed Gerties for more and more filthy lucre.
That’s why last week "One Hand" awkwardly invoked St. Paul as a lame pretext to insinuate “greater generosity as we plan out our Lent.” Here it’s obvious Dannie’s planning on an budget-bustin' exterminator and a brand-new stove. (Will it be a high-end, top-of-the-line Wolf range?) You know, a mention of the word “generosity” from Wee Dan is like Chekhov’s gun: if you see one in the first act, it’ll go off in the second or third. So Gerties should brace themselves for some loud collection-assaults come Ash Wednesday. Only big-spending can soothe a cult master's anxiety about on-rushing doom.
But he won’t get the bucks he needs to stem the cult center’s irreversible decline into a dark, sere wasteland. He’s lost the cultlings’ hearts and minds. They remain because they’re afraid to stay home alone. The long years of propaganda and disinformation have paid off only in one respect: the cult masters have a captive (though restive) audience. But the failure to mend their spendthrift, quarrelsome ways or to make reparation has produced deep, bitter resentment. The people are so alienated they openly admit they'd leave the SW Ohio cult in an instant, if they thought they could. Only brutal spiritual terrorism keeps them from bolting.
Other calamities, too, are weighing heavily on the cult masters, as the bleak, dilapidated, shoddily constructed edifice continues to come unglued. Everything is going so very wrong, especially for Tony Baloney. The Blunderer is under unceasing attack from every side. (Check out this masterly skewering from “The Remnant.”) All he can do is spin his wheels uploading painfully amateur videos where he looks like a deer caught in a hillbilly poacher’s spotlight. Those long, futile hours of script preparation and sideshow production must leave little time for him to engage in much pastoral work or lend a hand with the other duties that helpless Li'l Dan expects. Either the indolent “Young Fathers” have to do them, or they’re left undone. And with each video release comes a lucid, trenchant counterattack forcing the Cheeseball to slip back into the rut of more YouTube folly.
Insider reports confirm the strain is showing. Erroneous Antonius hasn’t the resources — intellectual or monetary — to give his distinguished, learned opponents a book-length answer. Exacerbating his dilemma is the awareness that an army of eager critics — critics with a real university education — stands ready to trash anything he writes in impotent defense.
Therefore, he doesn’t dare publish anything. Surrounded by idiot peers, he's got no one to proofread his ad-hominem drivel (which, BTW, intimidates nobody). Better hand him a box of tissues to wipe all the tears. On second thought, make that two boxes, because the cultlings are fed up with his crackpot polemics and misplaced priorities. They just want the Mass ─ and some peace and quiet.
Soon they’ll have to make their demands known. They can read the ominous signs almost as well as we can. It can't go on like this much longer.
Through the lens of disgust, cult-drunk Gerties finally see things are falling apart. At such times, dysfunctional leadership always seeks refuge in mindless distractions. Each sign of internal decay is as clear as glass: Checkie picks senseless fights he can’t win. Dannie craves foreign travel while obsessing over his ghoulish cats (which seem intimidated by the hyper-aggressive mice). Malformed pseudo-clergy immerse themselves for months at a time in dead-end, unnecessary projects like the enormously incompetent ORDO 2016, or they escape to far-flung "missions" that will never be self-supporting. Inevitably, the laity must pay for this frivolity — financially and spiritually.
But not for long, we think. Something big is on the horizon. It's coming.
You don't need a crystal ball to perceive these are end times for the SW Ohio cult.
Trad-mageddon starts as soon as a newly spawned "bishop" crawls out from the fetid swampland muck of feculent, southern Tradistan.
I remember there is an old post here where an audio file of rats biting stuff was linked.
ReplyDeleteDo you remember which post it was?
Sure. May 22, 2011, at the word "bruxing"
DeleteClick here to go to the post
Yeah, that's it. I knew there was a specific word for what the rats were doing but I couldn't remember.
DeleteThanks.
You're very welcome.
DeleteWe would suggest that Gerties listen to the file repeatedly in order to learn to recognize the sound. If they hear it at the Lenten potluck suppers, they'd be wise to hightail it out of there. (They should take care not to step in any mounds of mouse droppings on their way out. One mode of transmitting salmonellosis is through rodent feces.)
I am totally confused!
DeleteAren't Cats supposed to prevent mice from nesting in the house? Isn't that the natural order of things? Why is it then, that these FAT Cats are not earning their keep? Does everything go against the natural order at SGG?
Very insightful. The world is turned upside down at cult central.
DeleteThese felines are only capable of preying upon weak, defenseless baby bunnies and itty-bitty birdies. When confronted by rough 'n' tough house mice, their natural prey, they can't hack it. Just like the cult masters. Stand up to them, and they'll turn tail and run. If only the Gertie men were like the SGG mice.
I'm sick of hearing about the stupid cats in the newsletters. Talk to your parishioners about what is important, not the stupid cats. How do these cats get talked about week after week as though they are the Church's mascot? It's quite sick. Egyptians worshipped cats, not Catholics.
ReplyDeleteWe're right behind you on this one.
DeleteHey,Pistrina.Why did big don say the funeral Mass for late Bp Robert Mckenna?We thought Bp Neville was taking care of him.Do you know anyone who attended and what were the numbers?Anyone from cmri there?
ReplyDeleteNow you've asked the $64,000 question.
DeleteWe heard that the laity were discouraged from attending the funeral Mass in order to make room for the clergy and the family. Neville was letting him live at his house, but obviously doing a pontifical requiem Mass was beyond his capabilities, so he had to call in the "A Team." Subsequently, it seems, Big Don has said Mass at Highland. That must've been hard for some of the folks there to swallow.
We haven't heard if the CMRI was present, but we wouldn't discount it. All these guys are now strange bedfellows since Dannie blew up TradNation in 2009. So much for traddie resolve and dedication to principle. Shame on the laity for putting up with this nonsense.
Any idea how many attend Highland?
ReplyDeleteNo, we've nothing recent. Since 2010 there hasn't been too much news about the place. All we can say is that some of the big supporters used to want nothing to do with Big Don. In fact, many of these people were very vocal about their seething contempt for the rector, one of them even going so far as to send him an insulting letter. (The separation was very nasty when it occurred, and the Donster was p.o.'d to the max.) We'd love to hear how they've reconciled themselves to their new incorporation within the Brooksville cult. However, given that hypocrisy is the hallmark of traditional Catholics, many'll probably make the transition without the slightest twinge of resentment. The question is, How much of this newly found coziness are they willing to take before the put their foot down?
DeleteIs it correct that there were some problems with Mckenna's nuns and they left Monroe,CT?
ReplyDeleteIt was sad to read the recent article on the Lay Pulpit about Bernie.Yes,they are just scum of the lowest.Friends of ours also made comments to several CMRI priests about certain grave problems and they were told they were no longer welcome at their Chapels.To do damage control,these priests then spread untruths about them to try and hide the facts to the rest of the lay folk.Can you believe it.The only good thing was in the end,some of the others woke up to the complete lies and left.
Do you have any idea how many former SGG folk are over at Norwood at Immaculate Conception Church under Fathers Greenwell and Jenkins?
Yes, it was a very nasty episode. Extremely shabby.
DeleteWe can — and do — believe these scum buckets are capable of anything. But as you note, it's good when they behave so badly: the people then can see these men for the crud bags they really are.
These pseudo-clergy don't realize that constructive criticism could help them. Their poor formation has only taught them to be defensive when confronted by the truth.
Lately, we haven't heard any exact figures. A few have gone elsewhere, and one blowhard once returned to SGG, but later left. Some of the people had been so brainwashed by all the propaganda that they found it difficult to assist at IC. But at least Bernie attended until his death and was buried out of that chapel.
If there are only a handful of people who speak out, there are so many more who don't or won't. They possibly have been so turned off by their association with these people that they may have left the traditional movement all together. Another possibility is that they are too intimidated by these men to say anything about what has been going on because they either have threatened them or still have family involved in the cult.
ReplyDeletePlease tell me how many schools are involved here? Has the SGG school produced any vocations? One priest came from one of their churches, but it wasn't from the school. So please tell me how this school is superior to others?
If there are alternatives in cincinnati, what do these men have on their parishioners that makes them stay? Or are they staying due to convenience or that they really do have respect for these places?
Above, you mentioned propaganda at IC. Why does Cekada spread propaganda when so many years ago, he insisted that people were spreading hate and propaganda with his own school? We all know that if even part were true, no child should be attending, no family should support, and no clergy should associate themselves with them.
We know of no vocations ending in ordination to the priesthood coming out of SGG. The only one emerging the cult came from the Columbus chapel, and he had been home-schooled.
DeleteWe've asked the same question about why the Gerties remain when there are so many alternatives. The best answer we have is that people stay for the "really big show." We know of individuals who despise Dannie and Checkie but who still assist at SGG because "they do a good job" with the ceremonies.
In addition, we think the people believe that they'll have to make a general confession and abandon all other friendships in order to attend IC. We've been assured by IC insiders that's not the case, but the belief persists. From what we heard, IC welcomed many of the SGG refugees from 2009. Maybe those that left were too ashamed of having supported the cult masters and were unwilling to admit in their hearts that SSPV was right to reject Dannie and his doubtful orders.
I read the 'Bishop's Corner' for this week & sure enough - he never mentions again that father of 8 who was his parishioner & was killed. No mention as to when the funeral- nothing. How cold-hearted can he be? He couldn't mention that father, but he did praise Lotarsky for his placemats! The only good thing was he didn't go on & on about the cats.
ReplyDeleteThat was one of Dannie's lowest moments. The worst of it is that he could have gotten all the information he needed from his gofer in Milwaukee. Perhaps he didn't want to excite any generosity directed toward people really in need.
Delete"They possibly have been so turned off by their association with these people that they may have left the traditional movement all together."
ReplyDelete[Raises hand] You just described me. After decades of being in various trad chapels, I'm so sick of traditionals and anything to do with traditional Catholicism (including the old Mass), that I want nothing more to do with it. I've returned to the novus ordo.
What I found is that most traditionals are what I call "surface Catholics." They never internalized the faith. It's all surface piety or, if you will, pious frauds.
How right you are. Everything with them is superficial. We call them "God-bless-you-Catholics": All external piety but nothing of substance within. They scandalously accept as Gospel truth any barbaric nonsense their highly dubious "clergy" tell them. If they had anything substantial in their souls, they'd reject these despicable and malformed dregs.
DeleteSo you rejected the Mass of all time because you didn't like certain people?
DeleteNot at all. These men are not the Mass, no matter what they tell you. Moreover, there are abiding questions about their validity as priests. It's best to stay away. Who wants to risk adoring bread?
DeleteAnon 2/10/16, 11:54p.m.
DeleteThe fact of major problems with "traditional groups" does mean the Conciliar church is the true Church, or that the Novus Ordo Missae is good.
In order to find the truth, you need to separate yourself from artificial man-made constructs.
We have, and the truth is the traddie cults are evil.
DeleteI will have to agree with these men being evil. Maybe they didn't start out that way, but they have twisted Catholicism so much that it makes you wonder if the devil has been the one influencing these people. When things are all about the show/the production, and no longer about the Mass and bringing one closer to Our Lord, than it is obvious that it is something else influences them.
DeleteCan you actually picture Our Lord choosing these men to be apostles? Personally, I cannot. It isn't that I don't think we all do not sin, we do. No one is infallible here. It is just that when you refuse to recognize your fault, be humble and apologize, and then turn around and use money so unwisely (aka: steal) from your parishioners, there is something majorly wrong.
A man that spends so much time on the Internet, writing flawed books, making you tube videos, etc. is neglecting his flock and seeking what the devil wants us all to seek....pride. This man lacks humility. He likes to hear himself talk and likes recognition. I'm sorry, but I don't see that as someone I can follow or someone who has the humility and honor to actually say the true Mass.
You have made the case perfectly for avoiding these men at all costs. The crisis in the Church gave them a career, which they could never have enjoyed without Vatican II. The same crisis blinded the faithful to the serious deficiencies in these "clerical" entrepreneurs.
DeleteIn the past, had these men by some strange quirk made it to the priesthood, the authorities would have eventually forbidden them to say Mass. Absent that authority, the laity must effect the same remedy by rejecting them. If they don't have a paying audience, they'll take themselves out of the game.
Anon 1:59PM & PL - I so agree with you! The shepherd has been struck and the sheep have been scattered & left in the wilderness & darkness. I always felt so alone & it's so good to see someone else of like spirit. PL, I hadn't thought of that (your 3:15PM post) but you're exactly right!!!
DeleteThere are very many Catholics who feel the same as you and Anon 1:59.
DeleteI've never read any saint or theologian who told people to stay home and deprive themselves of the Sacraments if they thought their clergy were evil. Anyone want to come up with an example? One will be plenty.
DeleteAnon 12:15 February 14
DeleteThese men have no oversight or supervision.They deny Sacraments to anyone and everyone whom they deem unfit.This is a major problem and it drives soul's away from the Faith.
I have noticed a puritan type mindset amongst the independent clergy.Am I the only one who's encountered this before?
DeleteAnon 12:15AM - You are correct that no saint or theologian would tell anyone to stay away from evil clergy. I think though that they would rightly tell them to stay clear of INVALID clergy. Big difference.
DeleteAnon 1:11, what do you mean by Puritan mindset?
DeleteIt's not all of them let me be clear.I notice the ones who I describe as "puritan" tell people to not drink alcohol,not go to the beach,not listen to music that isn't chant,do not watch movies,do go on internet,do not read non-Catholic books,etc..basically condemning the entire material world like a Jansenist. (I don't mean being an alcoholic but Pope Leo 13th drank wine daily)
DeleteSanborn? You said beach, so I'm guessing the Florida ones
DeleteNo I haven't ever met Bishop Sanborn or anyone else mentioned on these blogs.
DeleteBest of luck friend.Personslly speaking,there is NO WAY I could go back to the novus ordo.I wish you the best,hope it works out for you.
DeleteAnon 2/14/16 12:15am:
DeleteObviously no theologian told Catholics to avoid the sacraments, but that is not the question at hand. Do Catholics have an obligation to ask priests under censure for the sacraments? That is the real question, and the answer is certainly "no."
When you meet these religious, you can tell they like the "privileged" lifestyle. Did the Sgg/MHT priests come from wealth? If so, do they just assume their parish should keep them in that style? Is it only the top priests who live such a lifestyle? This seems more like the Novus Ordo bishops that have been investigated for misuse of funds? Yet, in this situation, they do not have anyone overseeing them so they can spend as much as they want.
ReplyDeleteDannie and Checkie certainly didn't come from wealth -- far from it. But aspiration can go a long way in making up for what was denied during youth.
DeleteAll human beings need supervision, and its absence among the trads has resulted in the mess we have today. Years ago, a very wise farm wife who had been involved in the traditional movement since its inception warned founding members of a chapel affiliated with SGG to "keep 'em poor," meaning don't overfund these self-interested bums or you'll be sorry.
Keeping the pursestrings tight is the only way to keep the traddie pseudo-clergy in line. That's why we say, "Starve the beast."
I think even acknowledging the reality of such groups as legitimate entities is the first misstep. None of these "groups" exist under the law, and must be seen as such. I would not go so far as to call the "groups" evil, but they all have the potential for evil if they believe or promote the idea that they are the legitimate pastors over those who go to their private chapels, or in any other way lead astray the faithful Catholics who trust them on matters of faith and morals. These groups are private associations who have no legal authority over their own members or anyone else.
ReplyDeleteI think that the correct response to this crisis was derailed when the decision was made to ordain illicit priests in the 1970's followed by illicit bishops. It was this decision and the decision to form organizations such as the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV and others that got things off track.
We are now in a situation in which we have a right to the sacraments from such priests, but, the reality is that such priests should not even exist, as the "training," "approval," ordinations/consecrations done were illegal.
No one can stand in for the lawful Shepherds in their absence.
With a few qualifications on each of your assertions, we pretty much agree with everything you say. In our view, the consecration of unlawful bishops is at the heart of all the Traddie dilemma, for without authority to regulate behavior, the worst elements of human nature surfaced in these unprepared, self-elected adventurers. Had there been another means to secure a supply of validly ordained priests, traditional Catholics would have been spared much misery.
DeleteIn the case of a number of what we'll call "rogue faux-Catholic associations," the leaders have actually drifted into the evil of promoting themselves as rightful pastors, sometimes indirectly by insinuation or posture or mental reservation and directly by overt claim. It is owing to the pseudo-clergy's transgressive overstepping of their limits that such a deep sense of grievance characterizes so much of the traditional Catholic community.
Your fine penultimate paragraph suggests to us that the Nagasaki occult Catholics who went underground in the 17th century were far more fortunate than we. The presence of illegitimate, malformed, unvetted clergy among us has caused far too many to lose their faith.
Gene, you're saying there shouldn't exist a single traditional priest or bishop today and that it all had to have ended with Lefebvre, Thuc and the other one(s) who rejected Vatican 2?
DeleteHad that been done, pretty much nobody would know about the real Mass.
How could we have access to valid traditional catholic priest's without Thuc,LeFebvre,Mendez,Duarte Costa,and Hnilica?
DeleteI am not being rude or saying anyone is wrong.Just very curious how we could've been guaranteed valid priest's without the independent bishop's?
Everyone here is brining up valid objections & questions please don't think I am being rude.
Anon Feb 13 9:24 AM
DeleteWe don't think you or Anon Feb 13 8:50 AM are rude. You both pose a real dilemma that we ourselves cannot resolve on a personal level, which we alluded to in the last sentence of our first paragraph above.
Are these men a necessary evil or is there a viable alternative to them, such as perfect contrition?
Let's hope that Gene, who writes so thoughtfully, will elaborate.
I want to rephrase my question:
DeleteGene, so you're saying that Lefebvre, Thuc and the other bishops who resisted Vatican 2, should never have ordained a single priest or bishop but that it all should've died with them? That a traditional/independent priesthood shouldn't exist?
You're saying nobody should aspire to be a priest since Vatican 2 and actually become one?
The fact is that the Apostolic Succesion could not or would not have ended with the these bishops. The Church cannot exist without the hierarchy anymore than man can live without oxygen. If the hierarchy comes to an end, that would mean the Church has come to an end, which is impossible.
DeleteThe priests ordained by Lefebvre were ordained without a mission, to work in private organizations, not under any lawful authority of the Church. These priests never received approved training, and their vocations or their training were never judged by the lawful authority of the Church.
The bishops consecrated by Thuc were consecrated to be free agents to do whatever they wanted with their episcopal orders, There are now dozens, if not hundreds of these bishops, all around the world, who remain ungoverned by ecclesiastical authority.
The Mendez-line bishops, in their case, use their orders for their own private group, and use their non-authority to bind others to not receive sacraments from the Thuc-line priests. This act of binding souls to a private judgment is a clear usurpation of authority
The ordaining bishops in this case ordained these priests knowing that they would essentially be free agents who would intrude into various dioceses throughout the world, and would be receiving no legitimate supervision from any real authority.
To sum up:
1. These priests are not clerics, as they lack any mission from a diocesan bishop or the Pope.
2. Their training is not approved training. They have all been trained in private institutions not approved or regulated by the Church.
3. Their vocations and fitness have never been judged by those who must judge them, namely the diocesan bishop or the Pope. They are the only people on earth who have the power to make such judgments.
4. These priests operate without any supervision from any legitimate authority, The SSPX internal hierarchical structure, for example, is a man-made construct, and has no commission or authority to rule over anyone including the priests it supposedly governs.
5. In cases of violations of the law, there is no lawful mechanism of administering justice against wrongdoers. The private organizations only true recourse is to kick out offending priests, which only further unleashes such priests on unsuspecting laypeople who may be spirituality harmed even further by such men.
6. There is no authority in place to keep such bishops/priests in check, so any of them at any time may easily usurp power that they do not posses and claim a power that they do not have over those who go to their chapels, or if they do not directly claim such power, practically act as though they have it. Laypeople generally submit to the "man wearing the Roman collar" so such acts of usurpation are not difficult to pull off.
So, to answer the question above, with the exception of the ordinations of priests by Bp. de Castro Mayer for his diocese, I do not believe any of the other "traditional" ordinations/consecration were licit or prudent.
The harm or potential harm that has come through these acts of Illicit consecration/ordination which I described above is not the end of the reasoning. A whole paper could be written on this, describing the danger or the reality of schism, the creation of sects, the reality of usurpation by intruders, etc.
Gene in all due respect,you answered half the question.
DeleteYou are correct in above answer.
My question is how would we have true priest's & bishop's?The Novus ordo has only consecrated (to my knowledge) 1 valid Bishop.(Bishop Rangel Brazil)
Also,the group in England with episcopal order's in the Hnilica line state on their site they don't have any authority other than to confer Sacraments and celebrate Holy Mass.They also don't claim to have the answer to our current crisis,other than to keep the Roman Catholic Faith alive during this time of usurpation.
DeleteI think this is the best view because they (Bishop French's group) don't claim to have ALL the answer's.They simply keep the Faith going.I am open to being wrong but no one can answer how the true priesthood would be kept alive with these Bishop's.(Mendez,Lefevbre,Thuc,Hnilica,and to a lesser extent Duarte-Costa)
Bishop Spellman allowed a Bishop in the Duarte Costa line to practice as a cleric in the early 60's.He celebrated Holy Mass and conferred Sacraments before V2 in the NYC diocese.(They obviously have valid orders)
Anon 2/16 3:32:
DeleteThe answer was implied in what I wrote above, but let me be more clear. I will just deal with bishops right in this post, priests are another matter.
The bishops consecrated by Lefebvre, Thuc, and Mendez are all bishops who are not successors of the Apostles. They merely carry on a material succession of orders, as the apostolic succession did not transmit to them through their act of being consecrated.
The bishops who are actually successors of the Apostles, otherwise known as the hierarchy, are still alive in the world today and will be until the end of time. We know this by Faith, as it is part of the Sacred Deposit.
Since the fact of these bishops' existence is part of our Faith, it is not necessary for us to know who these bishops are in order to believe the fact of their existence. We can be certain of it through our Faith, and that is what we must rely on.
For those that need more, I do have well formed ideas on how to identify these bishops, and who they are, but that is not pertinent to this question.
But, regardless of who these members of the hierarchy are, we can be absolutely certain of who is not a member. None of the "traditionalist" bishops alive today is a member of the hierachy. All of them lack apostolic succession. If all of them were to die without consecrating any further bishops, it would have absolutely no effect on the Apostolic Succession or the essence of the Church. The Divinely commissioned hierarchy has lived on throughout this crisis without any need of them, as they do not count anyway. The hierarchy remains intact, although numerically small.
One last point, just for the sake of clarity, I am not in any way discussing validity of the orders, I concede that point for the most part regarding the "traditionalist" bishops, I am only dealing here with Apostolic succession, which is really the more important issue.
There was never any need for Catholics to lose trust in God that the lines of bishops could be lost without the actions of Thuc, Lefebvre and Mendez. Their actions did not, as is commonly and wrongly belived among "traditionalists' preserve apostolic succession. It merely gave the appearance of it being preserved, through these bishops, and by that creating a false sense of reality for those that mistakenly equate the "traditionalist' bishops with the hierarchy.
The new rite of holy order's are invalid.The main reason,Paul VI lied and his basis for the new rites do not exist in the writings of St.Hippolytus.
DeleteFrom your lack of an answer in 2 different long responses,it's obvious your like the rest of us,we don't have answers.
Myself included,no one can say how we would've kept valid priest's & bishop's without Bishop's Thuc,Mendez,Hnilica,etc..Apostolic succession died in the novus ordo in July 1968 within the novus ordo.They replaced Roman Catholic holy order's with invalid Anglican order's.
You're correct in what you did answer,thank you for responding.
I did answer your specific question. I never mentioned the Paul VI rite, and I like you do not believe any Roman rite appointees, post-1968 are successors of the Apostles.
DeleteWith that said, there are many other bishops alive today who do meet the criteria. I also pointed out that it is not necessary for us to be able to identify them by name, we just need to trust that they exist, as a matter of Faith.
It seems to me that you are conflating valid episcopal lines with apostolic succession.
I can see where you would think that but its not the case.
DeleteHere is my question.
Novus ordo kicks in full time 1965.Say most Catholics would've boycotted this move and stayed home.Secondly,no bishops consecrate anyone nor ordains anyone,nor do they celebrate holy mass.This goes on for decades and everyone stays at home.This becomes the norm and 2 full generations have never been in a church or even witnessed 1 holy mass.
Is this what you're saying we should be done?
No one can answer (myself included) how we would've had valid clergy or holy mass without these vagrant clergy with no mission from the church.
I am not saying independent's are the answer.This is basically what I have been asking.
The Novus Ordo Missae began in 69, it was the Council that was approved in 65. Both actions by Paul VI drew great reactions. It was the Novus Ordo, however, that led priests throughout the world to openly resist their bishops who were implementing the new rite.
DeleteIn the 1970's and 80's, there were numerous diocesan and religious priests taking a stand, and continuing to use the Catholic rite rather than embrace Paul VI's Novus Ordo.
For this period of time, Catholics who were looking could still find the sacraments from these legitimate clergy. The trouble with this early resistance is that, for the most part, the focus remained on the pre-Conciliar rite of Mass, and the appeal to Quo Primum was incorrectly used as the justification to reject Paul VI's new rite.
The resistance lacked any real basis in Catholic thought, it was like a childish, simplistic reaction to a great and obvious evil. While folks focused on the Mass, the bigger issues such as: the impossibility of the Church giving evil or invalid rites, the necessity of submitting to the discipline of the Church, the fact of a "pope" authoritatively teaching heresy and errors against the Faith, along with laws that led to impiety, etc., were all put on the back-burner, or ignored.
What remained on the front burner, and this especially went for Archbishop Lefebvre, was preserving the "old mass" and a not fully defined idea of tradition. The concern also focused on what might happen when the lawful clergy who led the first wave of the resistance died, how would Catholics who relied on them get the sacraments? We would need new priests from new "seminaries" and at some point bishops, correct?
This line of thinking was built on many assumptions?
1. That we at all times deserve the Sacraments, and have the right to take action on our own unauthorized initiative to make sure we always get them.
2. That seminaries can be set up (or continued) with no authorization from the lawful hierarchy.
3. That priests can be ordained without being judged to be properly trained and fit by the legitimate diocesan bishop or the Pope. (Dimissorial letter)
4. That priests can be ordained without a mission given by a diocesan bishop or the Pope. Secondly, that priests can work in a private organization that is separate from the legitimate hierachy. Thirdly, that priests can enter any diocese and not only use their orders for the sacraments but witness marriages, give sermons, and hear confessions outside of the danger of death.
5. That bishops can be consecrated without papal mandate for the purpose of being "sacramental bishops" who are not confined to a territory, but who may roam around the world entering any diocese to use their episcopal orders.
6. That schools may be established without permission or the supervision of the legitimate hierarchy.
I could go on.
(Continued into next post)
(Continued from previous post)
DeleteIn every case, even among this "minimilist" position, when authority is not claimed or de facto used, there is still a lot of conclusions built on the assumed correctness of these acts.
I think the Catholic response of the 1970's was haphazard and dangerous, assumptions about how to respond were taken for granted as true despite the lack of evidence to support such conclusions, and a massive edifice was built on these assumptions, not a firm foundation, but on sand.
The edifice, as it was not built on a firm foundation, has been nothing but trouble for the Church, with cracks in its foundation and structure right from the start. The vagrants have in many cases gone beyond their so called "minimal" acts enumerated above, and have in many cases and to varying degrees conducted themselves as shepherds and pastors, and in many cases assumed for themselves such titles. There are countless examples that can be cited to document the harm done by allowing vagrant bishops and priests who in many cases have set up massive organizations, churches, and "rules" that must be followed for those who wish to be part of such "chapels."
To conclude: I think the correct answer is that the only correct response in the 1970's was to either identify Paul VI as a heretic and act accordingly or to retreat to a true minimilist position during the time it took to figure things out.
A real minimilist position would be retreating to ones approved clergy, of if they are not available to remain home or privately gather to pray with other Catholics.
At no time should private seminaries, organizations, schools, etc, have been established, or bishops consecrated or priests ordained in this circumstance.
The only correct response was to pray and look to the legitimate office holders in the Church (the hierarchy and the clergy of Rome) to take lawful action, to determine that Paul VI or John Paul II was not the Pope and elect a Pope in accordance with the Divine Constitution of the Church.
Unfortunately for us, this opportunity was missed, and all of the resources and energy of the so called "traditionalist" movement went in the wrong direction: the preservation of the mass or the continuation of valid sacraments and the establishment of seminaries and chapels to facilitate this.
With this distraction, the root of the problem was missed, and now we have what is for the most part a potential if not real "parallel church," that has formed out of the crisis, one with its own bishops, priests, churches, and seminaries for its long term survival, all acting without the legitimate successors of the Apostles.
I am not by this saying that the people who go to these chapels are in a sect, but it has all of the ingredients for a sect. These organizations, if they are not already a sect, are playing with fire.
In my opinion, we would have been better off suffering with Our Lord without frequent reception of the Sacraments rather than having this edifice of vagrant bishops and priests and their "organizations" that currently exist, which have grown out if this crisis.
One last consideration, in rural poor areas, prior to Vatican II, Catholics went without regular sacraments, some for very extended periods of time. Also, during the time of the Iron Curtain, Catholics also went for long times without the sacraments. A friend of mine, that lived under Soviet rule, told me that Catholics would meet at cemeteries to pray together on consecrated ground, as they could not get to Mass. Other examples could be cited.
I don't disagree with anything you say.Simply put,no one has any clear concrete answer's.
DeletePretty much everything you say is spot on.
I knew a cleric who was ordained pre-1964 behind the Iron Curtain.He told stories of celebrating Holy Mass in barns,cellars,basements of old abandoned bldgs,etc..
I personally don't think there is an answer.Secondly everyone disagrees on most every issue.
ReplyDeleteGene is a great writer yet me and him disagree on the Holy communion fast.He says 3 hours I say after midnight.
HE is entitled to his opinion.My point is no one can agree on any one single issue.
If someone has an answer or opinion (Gene included) please post asap.
We are being punished and confusion with lack of clear answer's is proof.