Saturday, April 9, 2016


Nearly all the evils in the church have arisen from bishops desiring more power than light. Ruskin

Editor's Note: Time is long overdue to share some email correspondence, the response to which deserves Trad Nation's attention.
Hey, PL. Long time follower, first time commenter. Your work is excellent but I have a bone to pick. Hope you don't take this the wrong way but all you do is tear down. You never build up, you never say how things can get better. Its all negative. Seems to me you need to talk SOLUTIONS or whats the use???? My Pop use to say everyone who complains has a responsability to fix a mess. What say YOU to fixing the mess caused by the "wandering bishops" you talk about!! God Bless.
Not to be defensive, but we have offered concrete solutions, for example, the detailed curriculum we proposed for training simplex, non-clerical priests as well as our systematic procedures for exiting the cults or establishing lay boards to keep rapacious "clergy" in line. In addition, our exposés of the cult masters' greed, bad behavior, and malformation are actually uplifting in that they help the laity come to their senses about these rotters with their self-interested intentions.

That said, we're willing to grant there's some substance to our correspondent's charge, at least with regard to solving the intractable problem of the orders of Tradilandia's episcopi vagantes. The problem of the cult masters themselves is easy: Don't fund them. Drive them out as soon as possible so we can all start afresh, cured of this darkling plague of money-madness, self-interest, inadequate education, and malicious pretense.

As a result of the above email, our editorial board has decided to post periodically about issues and themes related to the irregular bishops inhabiting Trad Nation U.S.A., with the aim of generating as much or more discussion on the comments pages than in the posts themselves. Assisted by a deep-thinking, well-informed correspondent, we're currently working through links exploring the question of traddie apostolic succession and authority, which will later become the centerpiece of this recurring conversation. In the end, we expect earnest traditional Catholics will be more able to begin rebuilding as soon as the cult masters skip Trad-Town, and Tradistan disappears like the latter-day, dystopian Atlantis it is.

But for this post, we'll start with something much more basic: assuring the integrity of episcopal orders. Before we continue, allow us to stipulate that Pistrina has no objection to the current lineages, viz., Thục, Fefebvre,  Méndez-González, etc. (Our concern with "One-Hand Dan" is the possible defect in his priestly ordination, not the lineage he claims.) Notwithstanding our own certitude, we acknowledge that other Catholics are not as sure, for none of the lines today is untouched by the tar brush of doubt. If these doubts are allowed to persist after the cult masters pack their carpet bags and leave Sedelandia for good, faithful Catholics will never cease their infighting. Tradition cannot afford continuing disunity: the stakes are too high.*

So, then, you ask, how would Pistrina fix this mess, and fix it soon, considering the cult kingpins are fast on their way out?


Multiple lineages. Wandering bishops must possess as many historic lines as possible to render it very difficult or impossible for the survivors of the several bishop-led sects to impugn validity strictly on the basis of an episcopal line.

Unfortunately, when the cult masters head out into the sunset, they won't carry their misrepresentations with them.  The brainwashed laity who remain will still retain unfounded prejudices against other economically competing  episcopal lines. Unless these prejudices can be overcome, the laity may again be victims of remnant ecclesiastical freebooters who step in to fill the unpolished shoes of the quondam Pooh-Bahs of Cultilandia.

Multiplying lineage claims, thereby removing any pretext for laity to abandon their chapels solely on the slander of invalidity of episcopal orders, will reduce the opportunities for the disgraced cult masters' trouble-making successors to continue stirring up dissension. With fewer incentives to engage in "sheep stealing," there will be a lot more peace and a lot less heartbreak for those traditionalists who choose to remain outside the visible Church. In fact, the creeps with only one line will be at a significant disadvantage. (We'll take up the problem of licitness in future posts.**)

Securing multiple lineages is easier than it sounds. As we observed before, there are almost as many wandering bishops in America as there are wriggling maggots feeding on rotting road kill. The three or four commonly mentioned grubs are not the only games in town. The Readers personally know of at least four other vagi who possess amply documented orders that include Thục, Duarte Costa, Greek, Russian, and many other historic lines. Moreover, we have received assurances from at least one of these men that he's willing to consecrate or conditionally consecrate worthy candidates.

Multiple lineages will also make it impossible for anyone to claim a spiritual monopoly by asserting the relative superiority of his one line to the disparagement of a rival's. (Witness all the insinuations about Thục, Liénart, and Méndez.)  Such a leveling will break any superstitious hold over the laity: the faithful won't have to stick with an abusive manipulator out of fear of invalid sacraments elsewhere. All wandering bishops and sede "clergy" will have to tow the line or face the defection of those who feed, clothe, and house them.

But why wait for the cult masters to decide to leave on their own terms? If you're one of those trads who believes you must have a wandering bishop for confirmation or orders or holy oils, you can tell your one-lineage-wonder to take a hike today. There are multiple-lineage men who can provide what you want when you have the need. Just think of the savings in addition to the peace of mind knowing you'll be covered when it comes to validity!

Consider these benefits:
You won't have to pay for frequent, unnecessary, expensive vacations to sunny Mexico. — BREAKING NEWS: According to unconfirmed reports, Dannie's got another south-of-the-border adventure in the offing even as he's shaking down the Gerties for $11 K-$12 K! — You won't have to house and feed them. You won't have to do their daily household chores. You won't have to cart their savage pets to the veterinarian's. You won't have to listen to their wild demands that you to do your part in paying for their stupid mistakes. You won't be tormented by the nihilism of invented theology. Best of all, you won't have to put up with any more childish power plays.
With these parasites gone, you'll reap the benefits that true economy of scale brings. One man under a consultant's contract for the few times you require "episcopal services" can serve all of what was once Tradistan. Think what your chapel will be able to do with the thousands upon tens-of-thousands of dollars you'll keep for yourselves! (Especially when you can get rid of the" principal" who started this mess.)

Now that you've seen the light, don't delay. Walk up to these bums tomorrow and tell 'em to hit the road. Only make sure they leave all the pontifical gear your chapel bought for them. You can put some of it in storage until the occasion arises and sell the rest on ebay.

* The traditional movement is as much characterized by squabbles over lineage as it is known for its opposition to Vatican II. There's Thục's handwritten admonitory note to Lefebvre about his orders from Liénart, who "n'avait jamais crû à notre Religion" (= never believed in our religion); we have Checkie's smarmy attacks against Thục until he flip flopped when Dannie wanted episcopal orders; then there's the cultists' attack against Kelley's orders from Méndez, and the tit-for-tat counter attack against the Thục line, not to mention the general mudslinging about the Duarte Costa lineage. All this would be the subject of comic opera if we didn't have such cases as a priest denying last rites to a some people because they would not condemn the validity of a disfavored line.

** It goes without saying that sede rustlers have no business citing canonical irregularity as an incentive for leaving a chapel. That's like the pot calling the kettle black: they're all irregular, illicitly consecrated/ordained, and absolutely without any jurisdiction. 


  1. Here's Piv's background in his own words:

    -Was ordained by Thuc 'Bishop' Musey 1985 w/rest of Shukhart priests who were conditionally ordained since, Shukhart was made a priest & bishop by Old catholics w/in one day of each other (Piv joined CMRI 9/74 (at 16) so spent 10 years under Shukhart.)
    -In 1988 wrapped up teaching classes at the seminary (?) and moved to Omaha
    -One yr later moved the seminary to Omaha in 1989 (30 yrs old when he was elected head of CMRI).
    -In 1991 CMRI priests chose PIV to be their bishop. Carmona visited 1/91 and told CMRI time has come for you to have own bishop (at least according to PIV). Consecrated 9/91; Carmona killed car accident 1 mo later (@7:38) [other sources state 1 wk later]
    -Consecrated Dolan to handle Mex confirmations and ordinations of Carmona's since too much for him (9:24); consecrated Davila 1999(9:53) because now the Mex had enough of their own priests to have a bishop (to me money must be involved, maybe Davila would give PIV a bigger cut or at least not cheat him like Dolan)
    -Have to be ready for opportunities—How CMRI moved into Alabama to get “our people” [PL you will get a kick out of Heiner ref Cekada assessing whose to blame, while PIV describes himself as a friend of the person whose congregation he steals]; 20:45 quiets concerns of "our (vs God's) people" about lack of papal authority by putting up photo of Pius XII in back of chapel and referring to papal encyclicals from true popes.

    [anyone who wants to found their own protestant 'trad' chapel take note (Bishop Ramolla, so well-trained by Cekada & Sanborn & ordained by Dolan, consecrated by Slupski, consecrated by McKenna consecrated by Des Lauriers, consecrated by Thuc (and 5 cats), I'm talkin' to you!).

    "You have Father Ramolla because the seminary exists and has trained him, and despite his criticism of me, I believe that all would agree that Father was trained rather well. He is trained well because I and Father Cekada, primarily, devoted ourselves relentlessly to the operation of this institution, and have worked very hard to do our best to preserve a high standard." Bishop Donald Sanborn

    Pivaranus doesn't say why CMRI was associated w/Musey (1985), then McKenna (1986) & then Carmona (1991) w/in a space of less than 6 years, but possibly cheaper rates from the Mexicans or Americans wanted to keep the U.S. territory for themselves (?).

    According to Wikipedia McKenna approved their rule: "In 1986, CMRI held its first General Chapter establishing a formal set of Rules and Constitutions. In the same year, the Rule was approved by Bishop Robert F. McKenna, OP, whose episcopal lineage can also be traced to Archbishop Thục."

    Entry also states: "Pivarunas currently serves as Superior General. Bishop Schuckardt (before his death) and his followers dispute Pivarunas' position as Superior General inasmuch as Bishop Schuckardt, the founder of the Congregation, had never officially resigned as Superior General and further claimed to have excommunicated Pivarunas, which would disqualify Pivarunas, according to traditional Catholic Church law, from holding that position."

    1. Mckenna got the kick in 1989 and then came along bishops Vida Elmer and Oliver Oravec for a brief amount of time.

  2. You may get a kick out of this Heiner interview w/Dolan & Cekada--particularly what they have to say about a parish school. Also this gem: "So, skill with the money, Fr. Cekada would have become a bishop, then.

    (Laughter) Yes, sure. He’d be a bishop with some young MC who knew all the answers and would push and drag him around the altar.

    I would have never been a bishop in a million years! Never, never, never. I have no illusions about that at all."

    Then contrast w/:

    1. Cekada is not very well liked. Everyone knows him as condescending, and he also thinks very well of himself. Humility goes a long way for hiding one's faults, and since he doesn't have much humility, everyone sees through him. It's a wonder at all that anyone ever bought his books, or were they possibly guilted into buying them and feeding his ego?

    2. Checkie thinks too highly of himself. Not a shred of humility.

      It appears that for him, the priesthood is not so much to labour for the salvation of souls (which according to St. Denis, is the most divine of all works) but an arena for him to parade his supposed abilities and demonstrate his superiority over every other priest.

      An arrogant twit. I wonder what Checkie actually believes and thinks about the essence or purpose of the priesthood. Attend not to what he says/writes; but what he does or avoids doing.

      If a priest (any priest) is not careful to cultivate true and sincere humility, he is in danger of unwittingly hijacking the beauties of the Sacred Liturgy (originally meant to glorify God) to serve his own ego, or the exaltation of self.


  3. AnonymousApril 10, 2016 at 2:46 AM

    "You have Father Ramolla because the seminary exists and has trained him, and despite his criticism of me, I believe that all would agree that Father was trained rather well. He is trained well because I and Father Cekada, primarily, devoted ourselves relentlessly to the operation of this institution, and have worked very hard to do our best to preserve a high standard." Bishop Donald Sanborn

    Ramolla was trained very well by the dastardly trio! He learned all their artful techniques of stealing, lying, and cheating, and not in that order. The confessional was his private dating booth. The collection basket was his private bank account, and he never failed to remind you, how much EVERYBODY LOVED HIM, lest you smell the rat through the sauerkraut.

    Personally I don't think everybody does love him. Obviously the Fatherland doesn't, they know how to get rid of their dead wood real fast.

    Beware the idiots who bear false miters, for you will pay one way or the other.

    1. "Skill with money." What a laugh!

      Just ask the people at St. Clare's about that $10K Lucent technology bond they ended up selling for pennies on the dollar.

    2. What do you mean the confessional was his dating booth?

    3. Wait a sec here, how can Sanborn say he was trained well and with high standards? Did he not later come out and say that he had his doubts about Ramolla all along?

    4. Yes he did. As a matter of fact Sanborn warned Dolan about Ramolla, and thought it best not to ordain him. Dolan's greed got the better of him, and the rest is history in the making.

    5. Yes, what do you mean by 'the confessional was his private dating booth'? That's a pretty disgusting accusation.

  4. The accusation would be disgusting "IF" it were not true. The fact is, it is disgusting because it is TRUE.

  5. Words fail. I thought that Ramolla was the good guy at the beginning of this sordid tale when he was the one against what was going on at SGG. This saga has more twists & turns than a soap opera.

    1. True, Ramolla opposed the scandalous goings on at SGG in 2009 – but not for the right reasons. He simply saw it as an opportunity to “score some points” with those who were mistreated during the scandalous events at SGG’s school back then (with whom he then left SGG -- about half the congregation). He, along with them, then formed a new congregation (St. Albert the Great).

      The problem is, Markus always had an ambition to be bishop. And because SAG (St. Albert the Great) already HAD a bishop (Bp. Paul Petko), Rambozo had to “get him out of the way.” He did this by conspiring with Thomas Droleskey (the author of the “Christ or Chaos” blog) to trump up charges of “inappropriate behavior” (with some seminarians) against Petko.

      The charges were proven to be false, but not before Petko’s name was smeared (and he was ousted from SAG, paving the way for Rambozo to become bishop). Droleskey got Slupski (actually, Slupski’s creature, Dymek) to consecrate Ramolla, with most of the parish (and its board) supporting him on this. (They also supported him in ousting Fr. Bernard Hall, whom Rammy also saw as a “threat.”) The few board members who DID support Petko were ousted (illegally, as it turns out).

      Ramolla repaid the loyalty of those who backed his schemes against Petko (and Hall) by then turning on THEM, leaving SAG a church without a pastor. (When he left, Ramolla absconded with a $900 miter he bought for himself, plus over a thousand dollars worth of other items.) So, Petko’s double-crossers were THEMSELVES double-crossed. This SAG remnant lost their church building, and eventually formed a new congregation (St. Therese); but, rather than asking Fr. Hall to return (which would have been the sensible thing to do), they opted to get a CMRI priest, whom they must fly in every week for Mass.

      Rammy went back to Germany for a time. But after he struck out there, he returned to the Cincinnati area, where he persuaded a gullible woman to bankroll him (along with a few other supporters). At last report, she and those other fools are bankrolling him.

      “The Shadow’s” comment about the confessional being Ramolla’s “private dating booth,” by the way, is 100% TRUE. Rammy had an affair with a married woman (who, fortunately, later relented, and broke off the relationship). Naturally, we cannot make any details public, for her sake. All we can say is that Rambozo is indeed a philanderer (as well as a thief). (There is much more we can say, but we’ll save that for another “Lay Pulpit” article.)

    2. Fortunately for everyone, Our Lord designed the Sacraments in such a way that their efficacy is in no way dependent on the personal merit of the minister.

      Do you see what this means? It means you all (everybody) can go to Mass, confess their sins with true compunction, receive Holy Communion, have their religious articles blessed, and receive Extreme Unction on their deathbed by any validly ordained priest, without having to pry into his personal life and speculate on what he is saying to some poor woman in the confessional, as if they had any way to know what he says in there anyway. In other words, all this gossip about what goes on in somebody else's confessional or what some priest took from some chapel, and whether he had any right to take it and what it might possibly be worth, has NO PRACTICAL VALUE to anybody, and makes not the slightest difference to anybody's personal salvation one way or the other.

      So if you are concerned about your priest's personal morals, don't waste your time, because it won't change your own salvation one way or the other.

      But if you're going to church trying to figure out if your priest is "worthy" enough for you, you're still wasting your time, because you're not going to church to pray to God. You're going there to partake in unworthy gossip and rash judgment.

      And if you are of the mindset that you would stay home alone just because you don't like your local trad priest, then just stay home, because you're going to go to hell anyway. You might as well get in some Sunday morning cartoons while you're on this side of the eternal flames!!

    3. AnonymousApril 12, 2016 at 6:03 AM
      "Fortunately for everyone, Our Lord designed the Sacraments in such a way that their efficacy is in no way dependent on the personal merit of the minister".

      Sorry you are flawed in many areas here. Just take a good look at the Church of Rome, since 1958, and see what they did to the Sacraments as instituted by Christ Himself. Validity does count, and so does intention especially in these times. I strongly suggest to everyone to be vigilant and Follow Our Lord by (judging those fruits carefully), lest you fall as hard as the innocent people of SAG did, to their mean spirited and greedy minister of those very sacraments.


      That is not GOSSIP!

      Study the difference between Gossip and the Eighth commandment, there is a BIG difference. Had the TRUTH been known, so many innocent would not have fallen prey to Fr. Ramolla and his evil trilogy of teachers.

      I myself am sorry that I did not bear the truth when it was presented to me, but remained silent, for fear I would cause scandal against a priest by Gossip.

      I was wrong! The Truth then would have set us all free!

  6. I don't care how great an imagination someone has, no one could ever make any of this up. No. one.

    Volumes could be written about the the goings-on in these traditional chapels and about the men who run them.

  7. Watcher, I think you meant that the married woman later REPENTED. I think she had already relented to Ramolla! See what a big difference one little letter makes? So she went back to her husband? Thanks for the update. Indeed, who could make this stuff up?!

  8. Has Dr. D been ordained now is the BIG question. Do you have anything on that?

    1. Mr.--Dr.--Fr. Droleskey is a priest.
      "He goes by so many names", but the one I love the best is BIG DADDY,a/k/a The BIG CON.

  9. Hey Pistrina, I posted a while back about a Novus Ordo uncle I have, the one who sings.

    I don't know if I mentioned that he goes to his father's house next door almost every night, and his father, actually his mother too, are being taken care of by a male and a female nurse. The male nurse is a Protestant and he's also manifestly effeminate, you know, those who speak sort of like women but worse! Like, a total faggot! But he's not homosexual, just effeminate.

    Anyway, this effeminate Protestant male nurse is there several times a week, and my uncle is always going on and on about religion and Bergoglio and basically complaining about all the things Francis and NuChurch have been doing; he's a novus ordo false "conservative".

    So he's almost always complaining about something right in front of this nurse, and to him too actually, and at other times he just speaks about religious issues as if the nurse was another Catholic. He also brings his laptop and shows him the songs he's been composing and all that stuff.

    This sort of thing just befuddles me because the guy he's complaining to or doing these other things, is an effeminate Protestant!

    I just wonder if you would know what all this would be called, because I don't believe it is good for a second. He never attempts to convert the guy, or show him the truth of Catholicism etc.; instead it's all just like I'm ok, you're ok, we're both believers in Christ.

    I believe all this stuff is scandal, making the Church look bad in front of a Protestant, and indifferentism, this is what I think it is, but I'm not sure, so that's why I ask here.

  10. So let me get this straight, using the right words when posting about the misdeeds of these scumbags on PL will not result in a deleted post? Without going into detail, PL admin please clarify.

  11. Anon April 12 5:59, I find your comment irresponsible on so many levels. Not only is it offensive, it is completely void of any intellectual or relevant thought. Go back to your basement and do whatever it is you do.

    1. The only reason you would find such a comment "irresponsible on so many levels", "offensive", "void of any intellectual or relevant thought" is that you don't think there's anything wrong with what that Novus ordo person does.

      This is yet another comment of yours against someone exposing the Novus ordo, for that simple fact. You still haven't answered the questions I posed to you. I thought you "didn't have time"?

    2. Seriously, you make no sense, nor do you possess the learning necessary to understand the complex issue facing the Church today. After all, you are the one who continues the splintering of the Body of Christ by your schism and by your obnoxious attacks on Pope etc. Whether you like it or not, you simply have no authority nor do your rent-a-clergy masquerading as bishops or priests to condemn let along say mass. The Pivster himself recognizes he has no authority which is necessary for validity, for the authority which God gives to confer the sacrament is absent. Mad man Thuc may have had the validity part, but once he stepped out of his diocese, he lost any authority given to him. Not to mention, his noodle wasn't operating right, he consecrated in total 15 individuals in a 6 year span. He was excommunicated 2 times and reconciled after each. He died in the Church. So, I would not trust the for one second any Thuc-line ordinations. SSPX is the only schismatic group that has legitimacy. Their seminaries were approved and accepted by the Church and they seem to have better internal control of their members.
      Now, not that you will understand, but the Church has seen her fair share of bad popes not to mention aberrations in the liturgy which coincide with the complete lack of order. History is replete with such facts, all one needs to do is look. The trad clergy at large e.i. the infidels mostly discussed on this blog, have no educations let alone seminary training to even understand history. When a mind is bent, twisted and malformed (conscience), there is no ability to a make discernment objectively, only a prejudice which makes the individual see what they want. These people are nauseating to listen to, for they have only the regurgitated falsehoods they cling on to for dear life. Do your own objective research and you will discover that you too have been the victim of a lie.
      As for your questions, restate them and I will see what I can do. I'm simply not going to re-read all the posts.

    3. I already wrote a reply to your latest comment, but I won't post it yet.

      First I want you to answer why you said what you said against the initial comment of the Novus ordo person. You changed the subject and brought up a bunch of other things. Stay in the topic and explain what you said.

      And, the questions were: 1) do you go to the new mass? 2) do you identify yourself as a traditionalist?

  12. I will have to agree, and that is a very good comparison of the post vatican 2 church. So many times we are told by priests never to reveal what is truly happening because it is slander or detraction. Maybe the independent churches would be better off if more was exposed of the leaders true intent? We aren't talking necessarily about exposing personal flaws or mistakes necessarily, but exposing cover ups, bad intent, and repeated ill treatment of parishioners. How many people have been mistreated by Dolan and Cekada before someone finally came forward and exposed those two? They always seemed to threaten any parishioner with the loss of sacraments or loss of reputation if anyone dared speak up to them or about them.

    I don't believe that Ramolla had the intention of doing what was right, but at least he had the confidence to speak up to these men. How long did it actually take for someone to take a stand? How many people succumbed to Dolan and Cekada's threats instead of exposing them?

    Quite possibly, their own actions are exposing them now. They stole how much from the Columbus parish? How much did they make off that Church when they sold it?
    How many bad financial decisions will they continue to make and expect their parish to foot the bill? How many toys will Cekada buy and expect the parishioners to pay for the unnecessary toy? How many trips to The Bishop's lodge or expensive restaurants will they take before the parishioners realize what their "donations" are paying?

    I just do not understand. You would not be considered responsible if you let anyone else get away with what is happening, but when a religious does it, you are told to keep your mouth shut, look the other way, and FUND it. It boggles my mind.

  13. AnonApril 12, 2016 at 4:00 PM

    "I don't believe that Ramolla had the intention of doing what was right, but at least he had the confidence to speak up to these men. How long did it actually take for someone to take a stand? How many people succumbed to Dolan and Cekada's threats instead of exposing them?.."

    I hate to burst your bubble, and I wish I could attribute Ramolla with the virtue of courage to have stood up to these horrid men, but the truth is the truth. The man who had the courage to stand up to Lotarski, Dolan and Cekada, solo, was a humble teacher. He defended the abuse of a young student whose parents warned "The Teacher" that if he did anything to defend their son, that they, Lotarski, Dolan and Cekada, would fire him.

    The cause was just, and "The Teacher" naive, and thought that 30 years of friendship would never end with them firing him for standing up for the truth, and for the right of the abused student against the tyranny of the Principal of SGG.

    He was wrong!

    Ramolla, ran out of fear from SGG when he heard the yelling coming from the Lotarski male brood, father included. He never confronted them, rather he ran to the house of The Teacher where he sought comfort, refuge and lodging, and received it all.

    The innocent were the parishioners who sought the truth as to what happened to "The Teacher", not the Preacher. Ramolla got the position as the Pastor, because of what happened to "The Teacher," and then he jumped onto the Opportunity Bandwagon, as the only priest. He was a coward then, and a bigger coward now, as his whole intention was to get a MITER, so he could be served, and not serve.

    " The Humble Teacher" was the hero to that story.

  14. I stand corrected, it took a teacher to stand up to these men. Thank you for clarifying that. Is your reference to Mr.Hall?

    In response, it still took how many years for anyone to speak out? These men have been taking advantage of others for years, correct?

  15. And just to be clear, if I indicated Ramolla was innocent or righteous, I do apologize. That was not the intent. My intent was that no one goes against these men out of fear of withholding sacraments or of a ruined reputation or possibly, the fact that everyone at these churches have been brainwashed to think you are never allowed to speak out about a priest or their misbehavior.

  16. AnonApril 12, 2016 at 6:52 PM

    I know that your two post were of good intent.

    You do not have to apologize for something that these horrible priests have made the honest lay men have to be concerned about.

    This is their sin not ours.

    You are right! Mr. Hall was the teacher then, and now he is Father Hall, but his humility and sincerity have stayed the same. There was another teacher in 2004-5 named Eamon Shea that blew the lid off of all the horrors going on in SGG. He wrote it in a poem form and I think some people could not handle the candor of the unvarnished truth. Cekada and Dolan set a smear campaign out against this Genius Notre Dame graduate by calling him crazy. They got away with it because the Parishioners were blinded with the old notion that, all who is in cassock and collar is good.

    This Blog and its staff has done a wonderful job to unveil the truth, and at the same time preserve the truth, by making its readers able to recognize Truth for themselves. We should all thank God for this blog, so that we will not be deceived by ignorance again.

    1. I was unaware that Mr. Shea wrote a poem, perhaps an homage to a certain exiled Guelph who wrote about 'sowers of discord' and Fraudulent Rhetoric from his era?

  17. If Thomas Droleskey is a priest, why hasn't he mentioned it on his blog? Where is his chapel? Aside from his wife and daughter, who are his parishioners?

    Who could ever make any of this up?

    God have mercy on us all.

  18. AnonymousApril 12, 2016 at 10:47 PM

    "If Thomas Droleskey is a priest, why hasn't he mentioned it on his blog? Where is his chapel? Aside from his wife and daughter, who are his parishioners?"

    There is no IF about it! Droleskey was ordained on the QT by Bp. Slupski. He was made to promise not to say Mass in Public. He is now in Texas, The Lone Star State, in a home that does not have tires on it.
    Why! Because he does not have to travel anymore to attend Mass.

    He is his own Priest, Parish, Parent, Partner, and Publisher. He once boasted of being the "Lone Ranger," now we know why he settled in Texas.
    I for one hope he never rides again! HiHo!

    1. If true this answers a q had about where in TX does Dr. Droleskey and family receive sacraments = saw no place near the place in TX where believe he is using a traditional mass data base.

  19. Obviously then, Slupski must not be 'all there'. It seems to me that he's ordained other questionable characters. Isn't he the one who 'ordained' Ryan Scott St. Anne?

    1. Every single one of these bishops have made mistakes, hopefully at least, in good faith. Pope Pius XII obviously made mistakes in more than a few bishops as these were the men that went on to lead Vatican II and the results of that unfortunate Council. Bishop McKenna (RIP) published an entire list of his mistakes (he forgot a few as well) and Pivanuras, Dolan and the rest, have done the same. Bishop Slupski has had the sense at least to stay away from these men and his primary concern remains the providing of valid priests.

    2. When did Dolan admit to any mistakes he made? I'm unaware of that, unless you are talking about his mistake of fr. Ramolla? He never admitted to his mistake of defending Lotarski. The only reason he felt Ramolla was a mistake is because he helped in exposing the school scandal.

  20. Yes he did! Never throw Caution to the wind when it comes to your soul. You must check the credentials of anyone working as a priest today. We never had to do that under Vatican I, but now?

    1. Droleskey's ordination fits perfectly into the novel "emergency" traditionalist bishop/priest devised in the 70's and 80's. According to this theory, any man could be ordained/consecrated so long as a valid bishop is willing to do it. There is no need of approved training or the required dimmisorial letter or the need being lawfully sent by the Church to licitly use the powers of the priesthood.

      According to this new model, with private priestly training centers, run by unauthorized individuals, and ordinations by bishops with no authorization to ordain, it seems that anything goes in this new Wild West of traditionalism.

      The rules are gone for these people, they make it up as they go along.

    2. In Mexico during the revolution and the Cristero revolt public Masses ceased because of profanation that often took place. What to do? Those who were able to offer Mass privately even sent the Blessed Sacrament with young children who visited their Mom or Dad in jail. Very often the child was instructed by the priest in this matter. Check it out, you history buffs. Was that our of the norm? Of Course. It was necessary since the Blessed Sacrament brings grace and life to the soul. In Eastern Europe, in China it was routine that bishops (during the reign of Pope Pius XII) would ordain (no one have a heart attack) even married men so the laity would have the Sacraments. Many of these married bishops and priests refused to cooperate with the "Pax Movement" (recognized by Rome) which were those among the hierarchy who compromised with the Communist authorities. It might do some a little bit of good to actually read history, study it, understand it. The Church survives. Thankfully many will not have to rely on the Sede Vacantist enterprise. Pristina Liturgica is to be thanked for at least shedding light on those who have no problem defaming and undermining the work of other bishops and priests who truly desire to serve the cause of Christ and His Church -without profit.

  21. "Consecrated Davila 1999(9:53) because now the Mex had enough of their own priests to have a bishop"

    -So is Pivaranus saying these mex didn't have enough priests to have a bishop when Thuc consecrated Carmona and when Carmona consecrated him?
    -Since so many priests have gone wrong in US that they've ordained would be interesting to know what's happened to the Latin American
    priests they've ordained.
    -How many Thuc bishops are there (living and dead)--does anyone know? Seems surely enough to hold a conclave if only they were the least bit like brothers in Christ instead of protestants all out for themselves and touting their own authority.

  22. More about Dolan's cattle rustling (real reason Pivaranus ordained Davila):

    "Third, Bishop Dolan's complaint about back-biting and, in effect, double-dealing is very interesting as he went behind the back of his own consecrating Bishop, the Most Reverend Mark A. Pivarunas, CMRI, almost as soon as he was consecrated sixteen years ago. Bishop Pivarunas consecrated Bishop Dolan in part to help him, Bishop Pivarunas, with his missions in Mexico. Bishop Dolan took his episcopal consecration and then began to build an empire for himself in Mexico (he offered the "right" Mass, of course) and took parishioners away from Bishop Pivarunas's missions without informing him of what he was doing. Bishop Dolan also tried to raid priests and seminarians from the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen, prompting Bishop Pivarunas to remonstrate privately with Bishop Dolan, effectively terminating any formal cooperation between them. Back-biting? Double-dealing? Bishop Dolan knows all this as this is exactly what he did to his own consecrating Bishop. Back-biting? Double-dealing? Bishop Dolan knows all this as this is exactly what he did to his own consecrating Bishop. Bishop Pivarunas has never made any public issue of what happened."

  23. More about Dolan-Cekada-Sanborn refusing to work w/CMRI even as accept consecration and lie to their consecrators (McKenna & Pivaranus) who of course are NOT their "superiors":

    "-The Bishop then told the seminarian orally that he was forbidden to assist at Masses offered by priests of the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen or to be associated with them in any way. Bishop Sanborn later wrote to His Excellency Bishop Robert F. McKenna, O.P., to explain that the "contract" was designed to test the seminarian's obedience
    -There is, however, the nasty, inconvenient little fact that Father Carlos Ercoli told friends of ours in Rhode Island that if he came to give a retreat for them, which I thought would be a wonderful spiritual experience as Father Ercoli is a very good priest, that they, our friends in Rhode Island, would have to break off all contact with Father Benedict Hughes and the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen, that he, Father Ercoli, "could never work" with the CMRI
    -And perhaps you would like to tell your donors why you threatened to cancel Father Julian Larrabee's ordination to the Holy Priesthood within a few weeks of its taking place?"

  24. Escape from the N.O.–who knows how many ‘priests’ have escaped from SGG/MHT:

    "It is, however, more than a little curious that Bishop Dolan once said that he was wrong to have ordained Father Jeremy Cyr to the holy priesthood, making his, Bishop Dolan's, first and last (to this present date) [Fr. Ramolla] ordinations to the priesthood to have been mistaken.
    "When Tim and Eileen Duff’s little boy died, Dolan did not – according to the little boy’s father -- shed a single tear. Yet, when Jeremy Cyr left SGG, Dolan cried. What kind of person is it who shows no emotion whatsoever for a baby, yet bawls when a grown man leaves him? Daniel, you didn’t cry when Fr. Ferrera or any of the other priests left, or when scores of other people left. Why the tears? What gives?
    "ADOPT A PRIEST PLAN Urgent: priests in great need, or fallen away: Fr. Merardo Loya Fr. Roberto Atocha Fr. Francesco Palladino Fr. Jeremy Cyr Fr. Artemio Fr. David"

  25. Can someone please explain the Cyr brothers situation? I'm afraid I have gotten lost with so many different topics being brought up.

  26. Just to elaborate on what “The Shadow” said on a few things: yes, Ramolla didn’t oppose the SGG clergy for altruistic reasons; he just saw an opportunity there, and he took it. At the time, many of us thought that he WAS a “good guy” (as we thought the same of Droleskey); we even had complimentary things to say about them in a few of our LAY PULPIT posts. But eventually, they both showed their true colors.

    Ramolla’s “hidden agenda” was, as we stated in a previous comment, to become bishop; and Droleskey was the means to that end. As we said, they trumped up charges against Bp. Paul Petko (St. Albert’s bishop at the time); and the gullible SAG parishioners swallowed their story. Ramolla also had plans to oust Fr. Hall too. At the time, Fr. Hall was physically in England (trying to clear up his immigration status), but was on SAG’s payroll – SUPPOSEDLY.

    In reality, he was NOT being paid; both Ramolla and one of SAG’s board members (SAG’s treasurer) LIED about his being paid; and when certain board members tried to bring this to light, Ramolla became irate, and RESIGNED. Concurrent with this, Ramolla and Droleskey’s plot against Bp. Petko was in full swing. The board members who exposed Fr. Hall’s “pay” discrepancy were persuaded to join the rest of the board in reinstating Ramolla as pastor – whereupon these same board members were (illegally) ousted by the “Ramolla contingent” of the board.

    Eventually, the plot against Petko was exposed (with one of the supposedly “mistreated” seminarians RECANTING his story (and apologizing to Petko), while the other – who wrote Petko what can only be described as a “love letter” LESS THAN A MONTH after meeting him – was said to have been “groomed” by Petko to do so. The problem with this charge is that Bp.Petko had precious little time to “accomplish” that “grooming” (about fourteen HOURS in total). But the bigger problem is that this same seminarian hads writtem a love POEM to another seminarian MONTHS BEFORE he ever met Petko.

    It was Droleskey who engineered this smear campoaign against Bp. Petko; followed up with a long, scathing diatribe (of 50+ pages), “Retracting Support for Paul Petko,” which he published in his blog, “Christ or Chaos.” We at LAY PULPIT responded, taking his lengthy report, and refuting it point by point. Because his original report (and our response) were so long and cumbersome, however, we followed up with four posts that captured the main points. (See,,, and

    Droleskey, embarrassed at having been “found out,” has since DELETED his original article – but we have preserved it in its entirety. One last thing, before closing out this lengthy comment (for which we apologize), we corroborate what was said about Droleskey’s becoming a “priest.” (But how – or WHY -- he did that while still “married” is a mystery!) Oh well, in Tradistan, all things are possible!!

    1. Hi, Watcher

      This would make Dr Droleskey the first (the one and only?) married priest in the latin rite! With a wife and child still living, supposedly with him.

      Such a scenario is not possible even in the Eastern rites, with mitigated rules on chastity which permit a married clergy.

      My understanding (if correct) is that in the Eastern rites, if a seminarian wishes to marry, he must get married before his ordination to the major orders. He finishes the academic year, gets married, and then returns to the seminary to complete his studies and get the diaconate. If he is ordained deacon while still single, then from that point in time, he cannot marry.

      But the case of Dr Droleskey beats this. And a trad bishop is willing to get involved in this?

      For the ordaining bishop and the ordinand to go through this farce, both must have been struck blind (in the spiritual sense, that is).

      Besides the requirement of chastity and celibacy - there is also the important question of positive holiness of life. After such public, horrendous slander/libel against Bp. Petko, was there any apology or an attempt to make amends? Remember the general rule of NO RESTITUTION, NO ABSOLUTION in the confessional? If this point is not rectified, this would be a case of adding sin upon sin: receiving the sacrament of orders while in the state of sin, besides receiving the sacrament illicitly.

      A veritable wild, wild west. Seems that Trad bishops/priests are not inhibited by any rules or laws.

  27. As regards Dr. D - perhaps they live as brother & sister since they have a child that must be cared for?
    There was another case of a married man becoming a priest. I don't remember what rite, but think it was the Latin. I can't pronounce, much less spell his name but it's like Cassaswami but with a few more letters. I'm sure someone on here knows who I'm referring to. Sorry that I can't Google him since I can't spell his name. Who ordained him? Slupski?

    1. Hi, Anon @5:55am

      I believe you are referring to the late Dr Rama Coomarasway.

      He was quite quite an intellectual. He was a layman from India, studied surgery and later Psychiatry (or Psychology?) both at postgraduate level in Ivy League universities.

      While still a layman, he lectured at SSPV's seminary. He wrote some books (e.g. The Destruction of Christian Tradition, The Problem with the New Mass) and articles (e.g. The Destruction of the Sacraments). He also critiqued the "theology" of Michael Davies.

      He visited the CMRI's Fatima Conference. Not sure if it was during that visit that he broached the subject of getting himself ordained priest. Pivarunas disagreed, after which he no longer appeared at CMRI Mt St Michael's.

      He was subsequently ordained priest (I don't know by whom), but I understand that he was not living with his wife/family.

      So his situation is not identical with Dr Droleskey's.

  28. AnonymousApril 14, 2016 at 5:18 AM
    Hi, Watcher...

    WOW! Did you ever hit the nail on the head!

    The amazing thing about a coward is, they never apologize. To date the Publisher of The Created Chaos at SAG did not apologize to Bishop Petko or any of the souls he reeked havoc upon. He has a group of trads that will follow him off into the sunset, for they know, no better.
    He has a Phd in Political Science, not Theology. But who really cares today in the land of Chaos. We will just have to wait for Christ to save us. Let me clarify, that would be CHRIST THE KING, Not Droleskey, "The Self Appointed Anointed One".

    1. Hi, Anon at 7:33am

      I am the Anon who commented at 5:18am.

      Cowardice is not the only amazing thing. Hypocrisy is the other amazing thing, and this tops his cowardice. The third amazing thing could be the depth of his self-deception. He might actually believe that he is a good, devout and holy person (the persona which he presents to the public). Let me know whether you agree.

      The tragedy is not limited to having defamed Bp Petko. Not limited to using or manipulating the 2 young seminarians. But also making the seminarians participants in serious sin (i.e. defaming Bp Petko). Leading the seminarians into sin. And not just leading, but possibly coercing the seminarians to do evil - it could be the dangling of the carrot of "ordination" before the seminarians. If the seminarians refuse to go along with the nefarious scheme, then no "ordination" for the seminarians.

      So you can see how much evil there is in this sordid episode:-

      (1) leading/coercing the seminarians to sin - remember what Our Lord said in the Gospel about those who scandalize the little ones?

      (2) dangling the carrot of "ordination" - this could be sacrilege, treating holy things in an unworthy/unholy manner.

      (3) Injustice - after making use of the seminarians, Ramolla/Droleskey left them high and dry. After using and misleading the SAG parishioners in ousting Bp Petko and Fr Bernard Hall, Ramolla/Droleskey also left them high and dry; just dumped them.

      Any moral theologian lurking around here who might want to confirm this point? Or correct me if I'm wrong?

      Ramolla/Droleskey hath wrought much destruction, as have Piv/Gilchrist, and also Dolan/Cekada/Sanborn.

      It is high time that all traditional Catholics wake up, acknowledge the facts (unpleasant as they are) and recall what St John Eudes has written: that when God is thoroughly angry with His people, he sends them priests who are not zealous pastors but wolves in sheepskin.

      The point: the people get the priests that they deserve. There is no escaping this.

      If the laity truly desire the good - then they must make up their minds to be truly good. This means prayer, penance, self-denial, purity of intention. Not TradNation politics. Not fake piety (as in pretty vestments, and pretty liturgy at SGG while ignoring weightier moral issues). Nor fake moral theology (this blog has given examples from SGG). Only when the laity has done true and sufficient penance (for their participating in and enabling of cult practices and organizations) will the Lord show mercy, as He did with the Ninevites of old.

      Thankfully, I am far from the reach of the cults of SGG, CMRI, etc. I live in South East Asia, where Catholics (novus ordo) are a tiny minority surrounded by Protestants (larger, but still a minority), Muslims and Buddhists. I do not have the benefit of the Traditional Latin Mass, nor of traditional priests. I am very much alone, but I am spared the predations of the cult clergy like SGG/CMRI.

      While keeping our eyes open, and alert against fraudsters, conmen and cults - let us all strive to be truly Catholic. If we strive to be just that, we cannot fail to be holy. Because the Church has all that is necessary to make us holy - holy teaching (catechism, sacred doctrine, moral theology); holy examples (lives of the saints; means of holiness (sacraments, sacramentals). Let's do that, while waiting for better days to dawn.

  29. Thank you on behalf of we who do have a few good priests that still serve us. You are right. God will never abandon us as long as we Seek Him. If you need a site to go to for the Prayer of the Universal Church, may I suggest This site is absolutely magnificent. Please go to it, as it has so much to offer for people like you, who are the true victims of a world gone GODLESS.

    Keep up the good work by serving God and not mammon. You have a special blessing given you by GOD for the Faith especially under your living conditions. God Bless and Keep You Always.

  30. Since when is it OK to ordain a man just so he can serve his little family, to keep quiet & never go public?! Talk about being insular! This is being insular in the extreme. A man isn't called to the priesthood for himself alone. This is as bizarre as pope Michael.

    1. In answer to a question about Eamon Shea’s “poem,” it was a rather lengthy one entitled “Ode to Reality.” To the “uninitiated,” some of it might be hard to understand, since it often made oblique references to things with which only those “close to the situation” were familiar. However, it was an excellent synopsis of everything that was (and IS) wrong with SGG.

      Eamon, by the way, was the very first to speak out against the abuses at SGG. He sent Dolan an e-mail in Christmas 2008, noting them (including the abuses at the school, and the unchallenged immoral behavior of the school principal’s sons); and he challenged Dannie to do something about it. The “something” that Dirtbag Dan did was to expel Mr. Shea from the parish, and then to mount a systematic campaign of slander against him (including accusing him of being mentally unstable). (At one time, there was even a rumor started that Eamon was going to show up at an SGG “parish picnic” with an AK-47 rifle!)

      After his (Eamon’s) ouster from SGG, others found out about those abuses (including the unmistakable visible evidence of a girl “large with child” by one of the principal’s sons), and got involved. For a time, Dannie and Tony were successful at “keeping a lid on things.” But as the abuses became more evident, more and more people noticed (and got involved). It all culminated in a mass exodus of parishioners in 2009 -- a process that continues to this day.

    2. Do you have the original "Ode"? I don't know if what I read was the actual one and would like to know.

    3. I was expecting something along the lines of Divina Commedia including the contrapasso from Inferno

  31. I hear so much about Fr. Gilchrist in a negative light. Is he with the CMRI?

    1. Yes, he is.

      He was ordained by Bp. Pivarunas.

      According to CMRI's directory for masses (international, Australia and New Zealand), he is based in Adelaide, South Australia. See this link:

      If you are good - people will get know about it.

      If you are bad - people will get to know about it.

      Simple as that. Word will get around. Nothing can be hidden for long.

      There is a Chinese proverb: 水落石出 (when the waters recede, the rocks appear). Very apt, don't you think?

      Same for the SGG School Scandal. Dolan/Cekada tried to keep the lid on the whole thing, used all means (fair or foul; but much more foul than fair). Yet the truth came out.

      Let this be a warning to all cultlings who enable the cult leaders. Carry on and you will be led to your destruction.

  32. Very well said.Gilchrist and the Cult leaders are just low life scum.They will answer to God for their crimes.

    1. We will all answer to God for our crimes. If Fr Gilchrist is not your cup of tea, move on; dust your feet and move on.

    2. To Anonymous April 15, 2016 at 11:55 PM. Those who have commented about Fr Gilchrist in a negative light are into their favourite pastime. I would not want to be in their shoes come judgement day. Wonder what their prayer life is like? They have to be disturbed souls. I feel sorry for them.

  33. You forgot the Hnilica line Bishop named Bishop Michael French from England.
    Hnilica was consecrated in 1953.(Long before the required Pius XII changes to Holy Communion fast & Holy Week.Holy Saturday 1951 was optional for parishes)