Saturday, September 24, 2016


We should, indeed, honor St. Joseph, since the Son of God Himself was graciously pleased to honor him by calling him father. St. Alphonsus Maria de' Liguori

Editor's Note: Today's DISORDERED ORDO, a somewhat lengthy and complicated post, is entirely devoted to a liturgical error. So enormous is the blunder that this month PL has foregone pointing out mistakes in Latin and editorial consistency in order to spotlight how jaw-dropingly transgressive Dannie's goof is.  By the time you finish reading about $GG impiety, even Gerties will tell Wee Dan and Silly Sal to stop hawking ordines. 

If the Readers were asked to give just one, solitary example why no priest (and no “priest”) should ever use $GG's ordo, we'd have to offer Dannie’s following instruction from Saturday, March 19, 2016 (p. 30), the Feast of St. Joseph, Spouse of the BVM:
Ad Vesp: seq. Dom. Palmarum, Color violaceus, Antt. et Pss. de Sabb, Ant. ad Magnif: Pater juste, com. præc. (“At Vespers: of the following Palm Sunday [N.B. = First Vespers!!], Color violet, Antiphons and Psalms of Saturday, Antiphon on the Magnificat: Pater juste [“O righteous Father”], commemoration of the preceding.”)
Right off the bat, we’ll stipulate this date in 2016 was a real toughie for rank amateurs to figure out its Vespers, what with St. Joseph, a Double of the First Class falling on Saturday, and the liturgically untouchable Palm Sunday following. Whew! Complicating the matter is this statistic from M. J. Montes:  a calendar with a March-27-Easter (upon which the date of Palm Sunday obviously depends) occurs only 5 times over the period a.d. 1875-2124, inclusive— at the bottom fifth of the frequency table. 

Furthermore, during that 250-year interval, the only years in which a March-27-Easter occurs are 1910, 1921, 1932, 2005, and 2016. Consequently, if you're producing an ordo based on “Pius-X-rubrics” and want to see what pre-Vatican-II compilers did, you've got two choices — '21 and '32. Admittedly, it might be hard for most folks to lay their hands on an ordo from so far back. Moreover, if you're Dannie or Silly Sal, you might be too bone-idle to look or too confident in your disturbingly inadequate knowledge of the liturgy to bother to check. 

This year's Vespers decision, then, was clearly a matter for pros, not malformed, Latin-less dilettantes.

Real liturgical experts with whom we conferred told us that Dannie's entry is virtually all wrong, largely because he seemingly doesn't know the elementary difference between concurrence (= the "conflict of two Offices, one of which follows the other on two consecutive days...[and] can take place only in the Vespers") and occurrence (= the "conflict of two or more offices falling on the same day"*).

March 19, the date of St. Joseph's feast, fell this year on Saturday, not on Palm Sunday. It was, therefore, to be celebrated normally, and not transferred. Hence, Saturday, 3/19/16, is a case of concurrence, not occurrence. As one of our expert advisors skillfully explained,
[Vesperson Saturday, March 19, 2016, would be as follows: Second Vespers of St. Joseph, commemoration of Palm Sunday, color white.  The Antiphons and Psalms would NOT be of the Saturday, but would be those proper to the feast of St. Joseph, as, of course, would the Antiphon on the Magnificat. The Antiphon that Dannie lists, Pater juste, is that of the commemoration of Palm Sunday.
Insofar as competently compiled ordines are written in succinct, formulaic language, all that was really needed for the Latin instruction were the following six “words,” not Dannie’s 18:
V fest, com Dom, color albus (“Vespers of the feast, commemoration of Sunday, color white”) 
Why so short when compared to the English of our experts? First, in an ordo, it’s unnecessary to add Palm Sunday, for even an idiot cult “priest” can see that when he looks at the ensuing March 20 entry. Second, in the formula we just used, there’s no need for a  2” before the “V” because V[esperae] fest[i] in liturgical parlance means “Second Vespers,” i.e., of the feast being celebrated, viz. St. Joseph, Spouse of the BVM. Third, it’s unnecessary in an ordo to repeat St. Joseph 's name since it's in the title of the entry.  (First Vespers, BTW, is of the feast to be celebrated and is sometimes styled V[esperae] seq[uentis], to which Deficient Dan’s ad Vesp: seq is equivalent. )

At this point, some foaming-at-the-mouth culties out in cyberspace are moistly roaring back at their spittle-sprayed screens in a barely intelligible, hill-jack drawl:
How dew yew'ns know, Puh-EE AY-yul? Yer ’non'mous “ache-spurts” maat be raw-ung! It’s jes’ thay-er opinion, ya know. Them dudes DEE-uhd-n’t make no pre -V2 oar-DOUGHS. Thayerfer, da BEE-uh--ship WEE-ins, 'n' yew'ns loust!
Well, the Readers thought the mad-dog “fans-o’-Dan” might bark something along those rustic lines.

That’s why PL looked for a pre-Vatican II ordo with a March-27-Easter before sitting down to post. Fortunately for PL, which does have the energy to do the research, our Readers acquired a copy of a 1932 ordo from Verona, Italy. (How’s that for authoritative?)

At March 19, the feast’s caption reads:
Alb. Sabb. S. JOSEPH SPONSI B. M. V. Conf. dupl. 1 class. Off. festiv. pr. ut in Brev. (“White Saturday [feast] of St. Joseph Spouse of the BVM Confessor double of the 1st class proper festive Office as in the Breviary”),
and here’s what it gives for Vespers:
In 2 Vesp. (ut in Brev.), com. Dom... ** (“In Second Vespers (as in the Breviary), commemoration of Sunday...”)
For those of you who aren’t familiar with “ordo speak,” permit us to gloss:
On Saturday, March 19, 1932, the crisply designed Italian ordo informed the trained clergy of Verona that:  
(1) The feast being celebrated that day in white vestments was that of St. Joseph, Spouse of the BVM, and it had a proper festive Office, “which,” as Matters Liturgical says, does “not take any of [its] constituent parts ... from the occurring Ferial Day….” Accordingly, there’s nothing to be taken from the ferial Office of Saturday in Passion Week. (Besides, if the ferial Office were to be said, the entry caption would have read something like 19 Viol. Sabb. De eo etc.); and 
(2) The proper festive office is “as in the Beviary,” here meaning it’s found in the “Proper of Saints” section of the Roman Breviary under March 19. 
As a result, when the well-formed Veronese clergy reached their Vespers instructions, they at once knew they had to say Second Vespers from the sanctoral Office of March 19 (viz., St. Joseph, Spouse of the BVM, the feast being celebrated, not to be celebrated) and then make a commemoration of the next day, Sunday.

Hunnh? Pardon us. What’s that you’re growling? Go, ahead ... repeat it, Gerties. We’ll listen. We promise. Just wipe your twisted mouths first:
That thar EYE-tal-yun oar-DOUGH don’t make us'ns no never mind. EE-ut coo-ud be raw-ung. Anyhows, that’s onlyest one yaar. Yew'ns ain’t proved jack squat!”
Spewed out like a loyal cult zombie, that's for sure!

PL anticipated Gertie genetic throw-backs would find cover in ridge-runner skepticism, so the Readers were ready. It so happens PL also got hold of a 1921 ordo from Carcassonne, France, where we found for March 19 the following:
Alb. Sabb. — S. JOSEPH, SPONSI etc….— Off. ut in breviar....Vesp. de festo, com. seq. Dom. ("White, Saturday, [feast] of St. Joseph, Spouse etc....Office as in the Breviary...Vespers of the feast, commemoration of the Sunday following").
So, there, you saucer-eyed cultie cretins! Our modern-day experts do have corroboration from the good ol’ days: they’re right, and your "BEE-uh-ship" Dumbo Dan is oh-so-wrong. Just as our learned consultants said: “Second Vespers of St. Joseph with commemoration of Sunday, color white and not  First Vespers of Palm Sunday, color violet, etc.,” as “One-Hand Dan” egregiously misled his dubious “clergy” (and most likely Big Don’s zeroes, too).

Let's now move on from the mentally incapacitated Gerties, O.K.?

rational objection to our critique — one, say, from an overly fair-minded, educated traditional Catholic (therefore, not a cultie) — might claim that Li’l Daniel blundered in good faith. Not having an old ordo at hand,  they could argue, “Dannie's only mistake, albeit a big one, was to give precedence to the Sunday Vespers over the Double of the First Class.  As it was a Sunday of the First Class, there is some room for excusing his error.”

Fair enough (as Cheesy might retort with a smirk). Maybe early 20th century ordines are hard to find if you’re a slouch. However, there are plenty of 2005 Saint Lawrence Press (SLP) editions available. $GG was known to buy multiple copies, and so did the pesthouse. In fact, Tradzilla used to save them and probably still does. Why didn’t Dannie consult it for a another opinion? After all, $GG’s ORDO 2016 plundered SLP’s scheme for noting the Psalms (click here), and as we’ve seen, the cult isn’t above plagiary (click here).

One glance at p. 27 of the 2005 SLP edition should have cleared up any doubts or at least given rise to some second thoughts:
V fest, com seq (“Vespers of the feast, commemoration of the following [day, viz. Palm Sunday].”) 
And big as life in the right-hand column is the capital letter “A” signifying White vestments. But His Self-Importancy and dribbling Silly Sal chose not to seek guidance from an intellectual and social superior.

Finally, it remains to address Dannie’s instruction Ant. ad Magnif: Pater juste ("Antiphon on the Magnficat: O righteous Father”), the only element that comes close to being right. Although mention of that Antiphon on the Magnificat from the Saturday Office in Passion Week is totally unnecessary for a properly trained, skilled user of the Breviary (seeing that the economical V fest, com Dom, color albus would've been sufficient). To be sure, that Antiphon was to be recited BUT …. as the commemoration of the SUNDAY!***

In spite of Dannie’s maladroit positioning of the instruction, some Bambi-inspired souls might defend his inclusion of Ant. ad Magnif etc. as a good-hearted attempt to help his liturgically challenged “clergy” figure out which Antiphon to say. Sometimes, you know, the old ordines were so expressively parsimonious, they became almost cryptic to the neophyte. And for that reason, even though Dirtbag Dan pretty much botched the whole thing, his attempt at greater specificity should be imitated in today’s ordines.

And you know what? PL would have to agree.

Priestly formation in the infamous sede “seminaries” is so bad that their completers need every bit of assistance from today’s ordo compilers. But let’s make sure the assistance doesn’t add to a grotesquely malformed user’s already overwhelming difficulties. And let’s make sure it’s in the right place, shall we? Hence, this is what we’d suggest by way of a contribution (although it’ll never be needed in our, our children's, or our grandchildren's lifetimes, seeing that the Astronomical Society of South Australia's tables show the next occurrence will fall in 2157!):

V fest, com Dom (ant ad Magn: Pater juste e Sab infra Hebd Pass) (“Second Vespers of the Feast, commemoration of Sunday [Antiphon on the Magnificat: Pater juste from Saturday of Passion Week]”)


There’s no mistaking it: Wee Dan and his addled sidekick messed up royally. Wrong Vespers. Wrong Office. Wrong color. Wrong Psalms. Wrong Commemoration assignment.

Utterly incompetent!

But it’s actually worse. On Saturday, March 19, 2016, any cult “priest” who recited what we'll call The Silly-Sal Vespers, a massacre of the Roman liturgy, necessarily failed to observe the liturgical rights of St. Joseph’s Office.

As a matter of fact, if "clergy" used $GG ‘s ORDO, then, at Vespers, they reduced the Patron of the Catholic Church to a mere commemoration on his feast day! (We hope the Mexican clergy associated with $GG had enough sense to ignore Dimwit Dan and thereby please God by praying the rightful Vespers of our Lady’s holy Spouse.)

IOHO, any “priest” who used Dannie’s ORDO and thereby omitted the Vespers of St. Joseph is culpable because everybody knows the $GG crowd is way out of its depth. Cult “priests” should have bought the SLP edition, not Dannie’s impious mess. If these clerical wannabes still possess the slightest sense of the Catholic religion, they should firmly resolve to ignore Dannie and Silly Sal’s sales pitch this December when the $GG ORDO 2017 goes on the market. "Clergy" can get the real thing from England (click here).

Reparation, "reverend" gentlemen, is in order. And you know it!


*Definitions from Wuest’s Matters Liturgical, where the all the rules for the “Concurrence of Feasts — Arrangement of the Vespers” may be found. (Emphases ours.) Although there’s a Latin edition, this book is available in English, so it should have been accessible to Dannie and Silly Sal. Fewer wasteful trips to Mexico would have left more money to buy indispensable reference books.

** We omitted the local commemoration since it does not apply to a universal ordo, a standard "Do-What-You-Want" Dan and Silly Sal can’t seem to observe (see, e.g., DISORDERED ORDO 2/21/16)

*** The Jesuit Bernard Hausmann makes clear all the rules in his indispensable Learning the Breviary. We recommend his work to every lover of the traditional liturgy (available here), but we must raise one caution: the handbook assumes you’re using an expertly edited ordo, not Dannie's disaster.


  1. Hopefully, some people still hearing Mass impiously blundered by cult priests will read this. If any cultists respond, they will try their hardest to divert it to pet topics like women in pants. What's worse than the standard run of plagiarism is the SGG sort where incorrect propers are said for the given day. If the plagiarism resulted in a correct Mass, something you could liken to a starving man stealing bread (the cultmasters are the opposite of that), it would not be so bad. Excellent, highly efficient take down of the SGG cult.

    PS Did Messrs Salza and Siscoe take on board the Reader's suggestions on their two parter 'It’s All Over for Fr. Anthony Cekada?' Part 2 had no glaring errors of spelling, which part 1 had many.

    1. Yes, they did in part 1. Those men are true academics and deserve our respect.

  2. AnonymousSeptember 25, 2016 at 1:16 AM


    "...If any cultists respond, they will try their hardest to divert it to pet topics like women in pants..."

    I absolutely agree. This article meticulously cuts to the core, it divides "the haves, from the have nots." Obviously once again Fr. Cekada, and his brood of misfits just cannot muster up to the level of Academia. It is obvious that he did not research what he should have already known. Or once again, he just did not know, and fed the masses anything that looked good. After all Ignorance is Bliss, and they certainly rely on it $$$$!

    Another great article!

    1. Thanks. What's important is that people realize that Dannie, Big Don, and Cekada are NOT the real thing. The sooner they get out, the better.

  3. Remember to add: "Pivarunas" to your list.

    And you absolutely right: the sooner people get out from these cults, the better.

    1. How right you are. If the list is rank ordered by education, he is at the bottom of the list, just below Dannie.

    2. PL etc are tops !!!

  4. "...genetic throw-backs..."

    How is this sort of talk Christian? Even people with no religion know better than to insult people for things they don't choose.

    1. It's meant to be purely descriptive, a factual observation, so it's no insult. The pond scum (another real-world observation) who support and enable the Tradistani kingpins must be a few chromosomes short of the full complement or they'd've gotten out of the cult long ago.

    2. Anon., Sept. 25, 9:39 PM, you might want to remember this paraphrasing of an old adage: “In the land of the brain-dead, the one-celled organism is king.”

    3. With high IQ and the knowledge of Latin "of the tops" on this blog, it is a great pity and waste that they do not make it to the Priesthood.

    4. We're all way too old for that and perfectly happy with our state in life, but thanks for the compliments.

    5. It's meant to be purely descriptive, a factual observation, so it's no insult.

      You bet your wrinkled, saggy and non-existent ass that it IS an insult, and un-Christian.

      What, you're saying there are no beautiful men and women in SGG? Or very smart? Not one?

      If they were all so genetically unfortunate as you make them out to be, then nobody would have any money to spare to "enable the cultmasters" since they would all be minimum wage families.

      But there ARE some families with $$$, aren't there?

    6. OK, then, if you think "genetic throwbacks" and "pond scum" are insulting, un-Christian terms, then we'll call them cretins.

      If you get enough high-functioning cretins to hand over a large part of their subsistence income, you can live very nicely. It's all a matter of scale.

      As for families with $$$, we think those are in B'ville. However, they're the bosses down there, so they use their cash to ensure they enjoy special privileges and exemptions from the nutty rules. The well-off can easily afford to waste their disposable income in this manner.

      Despite some contributions from the depraved who have money, we surmise that the bulk of the cash that keeps the cult masters in the clover comes from the creatures spawned in a very shallow gene pool, who deprive their blear-eye families in order to feed the beast.

  5. Have you been able to confirm the identity of Silly Sal? PL must be aware that he is the real source of the stupid errors.

    Keep up the good work. Priests all over are talking about about the SGG ordo. Dolan is worried.

    1. Nothing for certain. We've had a few suggestions, but no one has absolutely confirmed the identity.

      In spite of the bad Latin and all the other errors, we're sure it's not Checkie. He wouldn't want to bother with all the little details that go into making an ordo, even one as incompetent as $GG's.

      If anyone out there knows who Silly Sal is in real life, feel free to comment or send us an email.

  6. Anonymous September 25, 2016 at 9:39 PM


    "...Even people with no religion know better than to insult people for things they don't choose."

    You see you are mistaken. We all Choose one way or the other. If you choose not to make a decision, you have already made a decision, not to make a decision.

    Just as the following Anonymous September 26, 2016 at 6:25 PM

    CHOOSE TO BE blatantly insulting, and NON-CATHOLIC with the following remark:

    "...You bet your wrinkled, saggy and non-existent ass that it IS an insult, and un-Christian..."

    First of all this is directed to Anonymous Sept. 26, 2016 and to anybody who holds to his belief.
    You have no idea who the writer was for Pistrina Liturgica for this week. So to revert to idiotic name calling when obviously the writer is highly intelligent, and only performs a Catholic Charity by informing the deprived ignorant, such as yourself of a true Catholic Education, as once taught, only proves that your Choice is to remain ignorant.

    The difference with P.L. and their staff is very simple.
    What they say is truth.
    They back it up with facts.
    They offer solutions to the problems. They are excellent writers and obviously very well educated.

    While on the other hand all you have to do is talk to the victims of SGG School who were abused both mentally and physically, at the hands of the $100,000 raving idiot that they called Principal. Then you can count your blessings that this education you got from P.L. was par excellence and for free.
    Unfortunately we fear that P.L. is way over the heads of those who do not know, or do not care to learn, or CHOOSE to deny, and thereby support the abusers.

    SGG had a CHOICE to make that school a great success, but they CHOOSE to keep a moron on as Principal. Instead they CHOOSE to rat out the most humble, educated, and beloved teacher that school ever had. He was more credentialed than the whole Trilogy of those three Misfitted Bishops put together.

    So yes, life is about making Choices, it is called Good over Evil.

    So what is your CHOICE now?

  7. You see you are mistaken. We all Choose one way or the other. If you choose not to make a decision, you have already made a decision, not to make a decision.

    Reading comprehension problems?

    I even bolded what I was referring to, viz., the "genetic throw-backs" insult PL hurled.

    Your admired PL staff has consistently, since 2011, made insults about things people don't choose, such as (according to PL) genetic misfortunes and the way people look.

    You show me where such a thing was taught before Vatican II.

    Reading this blog, if I did not know better, one would think that God favors only those who are genetically blessed.

    But never once have these "genetic elite" from PL posted a picture of themselves to show just how magnificent they are (not).

    1. Our words are better than a 1000 pictures.

    2. Words indicate intellectual ability only, not physical appearance, but you still criticize people for their physical appearance, so pictures are in order.

      And if you still object, then you must admit you have done much wrong for making fun of the physical appearance of others, and stop doing so in the future.

      By the way, I'm still waiting for a pre-V2 teaching that gives license to make fun of people for things they don't choose.

    3. You may want to ask Sanborn or Selway for that teaching. He has commented many times about dirty foreigners, black people (despite the Nigerian seminarians), and fat women.

      I don't care for anyone to make fun of another's appearances. There were beautiful saints and also deformed saints. I think possibly some individuals are getting mixed up with the soul being so corrupt it makes these individuals ugly on the outside, despite what their appearance really is in the physical sense?

      The only explainatiok I see for these people staying at these places are spiritual manipulation through brainwashing.

    4. From Cornelius a Lapide:

      "Just as one discerns and knows a person by his appearance and way of being, one also knows the secret of a person’s soul by his face. The face of the hypocrite pretends to have humility, equity, and justice; however, if the prudent and wise man examines him long and attentively, he will detect the hypocrisy.

      "The face, therefore, is the image of the heart, and the eyes are the mirror of the soul and its affections. One finds this principally in tumultuous and vile men who conceal their badness for a long time, but when they are distracted and unaware, it suddenly appears in their face and eyes. Therefore, the face and the eyes indicate the joy or sadness of the soul, its love or hatred; so also, honesty or treachery and hypocrisy."

      (Commentaria in Scripturam Sacram, Paris 1878, vol. 9, p. 541)

  8. Do you know why cekada's mht bio doesn't include whh?

    1. Actually, I would like to see one picture of The Reader.

      1,000 pictures: how many albums is that?


  9. Anonymous September 26, 2016 at 11:32 PM:


    "...But never once have these "genetic elite" from PL posted a picture of themselves to show just how magnificent they are (not)."

    Don't ever become a detective Anonymous, as you are rank in your deductions. As eloquently as they write, that is the way they look. I can make that statement as I have had the pleasure to meet some of the staff. So as far as their respective superior intelligence goes that is only complimented by their well above average good looks.

    P.L. does not boast of their good looks or superior knowledge. The latter is evident, and the former is only a sin of of pride.

    Unfortunately, or should I say fortunately you have not been on the inner side of the SGG Cartel. All they are about are the way people, places, and things, look.

    They a$$e$$ those a$$et$ with their a$$ertion$ on how they can bring in more $$$ for their desires. They are all about the exterior looks of things, including the parishioners who support them.

    Perhaps P. L. is giving them a taste of their own medicine.

    What don't like it Anonymous?
    Good maybe you will take a lesson and leave these "predators of parishioners", and save your soul and your savings.

  10. Parishioners associated with Don have privately been told to stay away from CMRI and SSPV because of the "liberalism and non-Catholic ways" for years. In fact, many are told to stay away from SGG because of the scandals and how the devil is involved with that group. When, if any, do you see a break-up happening between these groups? Would it be after Don starts his seminary in Europe and "the kid" takes over the Brooksville compound?

    It is pretty obvious that Sanborn is heading to Europe to help build a seminary (and by-pass all the formal visa laws of the U.S.), service his mother's homeland of Ireland, and make room for "the kid" to take over the U.S. Seminary. Remember, past seminary newsletters have stated that our visa process has blocked many future seminarians from coming to his seminary. There is so much interest in his seminary that he turns people down every year. He no longer has the room to accept anymore, so something must be done to rectify this. What could be done? Raise a million dollars to expand his current seminary or begin a new one in Europe? Maybe the Kid's father knows the only way for the U.S. seminary to survive is by taking in tuition-paying seminarians, instead of the spots being filled by Non-paying Argentenians and Nigerians? The pleas for money are getting to be too much for his 300 or so donor families, so what can he do now, except beg for money in Europe by promising more European educated priests in his newly formed seminary? He's already tried expanding to rich cities like the beach areas, possibly North Carolina and Virgina, if I can recall correctly? That didn't pay off enough for him.

    What is left for him in the U.S., if or when he gives up his thrown to junior? Not much. There can't be two bishop's in one town, especially when the town is owned by one of the bishop's families.

  11. A first-rate analysis of the situation. The latest bait to raise $1.75 million for an addition to the pesthouse is a ruse. Tradzilla needs bucks to found his new "seminary" in France, as 12:24 has alluded to. Papa Moneybags, a businessman, knows that the B'ville freeloaders are an intolerable burden on finances, so the Donster is off to start a new scheme. This time abroad. It won't work out. The Europeans won't pay for it, and the Americans won't either. But TRR support might keep the appeal afloat until Tradzilla retires in luxury.

  12. With all Sanborn's "relocations", one must ask if he is swindling money? Has he not moved from NY, MI, CT, CA, MI, FL, and he is now talking about running/needing a seminary in Europe? He sounds like an old fashioned traveling salesman selling snake oil.

    1. Don't forget AZ, where he is trying to collect their building, Church, land, and money.

      Also, a good swindler hides his assets; hence, why won't see his "sports car collection", but he will have a nice retirement traveling Europe and enjoying fine dining and fancy hotels.

      There is also the seminary (Europe, U.S.), the brand new convent with luxuries, the special cemetary, and car to be traded every two to three years. If he is paid very little, how can he afford his fancy restaurants or his thrown of power?

    2. The problem is that the faithful allow these guys to run everything through a maze of corporations which they run with the help of their "clerical" cronies.

      The only cure is through lay governance, where the laity don't allow these guys to ply their trade except through lay-controlled legal entities.

  13. I'd say his collection of sportcars is truly fine.

    1. Bishop Sanborn actually has a collection of sportcars?? Am I understanding the above commenters correctly?

    2. No, he does not have a car collection. The Anon comment was sarcastic to dismiss the fact that he hides/uses his money in different ways. He has different corporations set up in different states that hide the assets. He's too smart to use the money for cars. From the comments, it appears he uses it for travel, luxury food, and a very nice retirement savings.

    3. The luxury food is a real waste of resources, since Tradzilla is really just a "meat-'n'-taters guy," which is disguised somewhat by the organic food obsession.

      From all accounts (many from priests), he's not very adventurous with food, as a real gourmet with an educated palate would be. (Many of our long-time readers will remember the calamari anecdote an Argentinian priest told us.)

    4. That was me with the sports car comment. It was a character of weak joke, a sort of sarcasm. When a few conciliar bishops were exposed, one of the things about them was the love of fast cars, fast women or men, and the finest of foods. I'm not sure Bp Sanborn has cultural interests. He seems something of a philistine.

    5. Indeed, he is, as witnessed by his remarks ablaut Wagner. His vaunted "culture" is merely P.R., like Dannie's. Everything is for show.

  14. I don't understand the following of these men. The attitude appears to be "If it doesn't happen to me, then I have an obligation to look the other way. In no way can I "judge" the religious or see their faults because I just want a mass."

    Is this what we have always been told to do? I believe that the silence is one of the ways one commits a sin. If you are still contributing to the financial purses of these men, despite knowing the truth, you are contributing in their sins and not "just attending for the mass and sacraments."

    1. The comments of Anon.’s 9:39 PM, 6:25 PM, and 11:32 PM (probably all the same person) are so-o-o-o tiresome – like all the others that this blog gets from “genetic throwbacks” who have nothing better to do than to nitpick on some tangent issue rather than comment on the article’s TOPIC (because they don’t have the brains OR FACTS to argue their point). One might wonder why Pistrina tolerates such lice. However, it’s good that they do, for these lice only expose their own ignorance by sounding off the way they do; and they embarrass not only themselves, but also the cutl masters that they so admire.

    2. Lice OR lies?
      Sandwitch OR sandwich?

    3. 4.
      Slang. a contemptible person, especially an unethical one.

  15. PL.On a different subject,we have seen in the St Mikes Sunday bulletin that the so-called "Clerics' there are asking for the lay folk to sponsor their "Nuns" to attend the Saturday night so-called banquet(it's really crap i.e salad with flavoured water)at the annual Fatima conference.What a joke.How about Pivvy hand over some of his funds in his secret bank accounts(yes,we know)Where did the funds go from the sale of the former convent at Colbert,WA(Mt St Joseph)Those who believe everything CMRI tell,are deceived.We hope the Critic returns with more of his inside info comments.

    1. Do all these priests have secret bank accounts? We know Sanborn has always had them, or at least since his Michigan days. Pivarunas has them too? What about Dolan? I guess they must have something If Lotarski is being paid well for having 16 kids in the school?

      This seems more like a mob than anything else.

  16. Mob yes and low life scum.It's amazing how well fed Pivarunas looks.His so-called "priests" must be a group of nit-wits to say nothing and jump to every command he says.A young man told a friend that when he was there in the "parish" of Omaha,that it was common talk that Pivarunas often when out in his car at night.

    1. You have nothing better to do but gossip. Above 3 comments [2:27 AM, 2:05 AM, 1:57 AM]- what has that got to do with your personal salvation?

    2. It never surprises us that people don't want to hear the truth.Shame on them.Thank you to the above folks comments.The Saints tell us to proclaim the truth,not hide it.

    3. Anon 3:17, I guess you have nothing better to do than read the gossip! A priest who hold secret bank accounts would be something that any parishioner would need to know. Any parishioner who gives money to men having secret bank accounts means that they are not supporting the Church, but possibly supporting men who have ill intentions and using the money given to them for these vices. Darn right, my salvation would also be questioned when being an accessory to another's sin!

  17. Anonymous September 27, 2016 at 5:40 AM

    Doubting Anonymous REQUESTED:

    "Actually, I would like to see one picture of The Reader."

    And many would have loved to have seen Padre Pio, just once. Somethings in life are just never going to happen.

    You stand more of a Chance in seeing the Great Priest in an apparition, than ever the picture of any of the Staff at P.L.

    They are only interested in POSTING by informing the Catholic World, not POSING for it.

    I can try and ease some of your curiosity.

    However, as one who has seen the the Parties you are interested in, including the Reader, your only satisfaction is going to be by that GOOD OLD FASHIONED TRADITIONAL WORD OF MOUTH TESTIMONY.

    This Staff is unique, not only in its obvious intelligence, but truly complimented by their respective well above average nice looks. Both of these attributes are surpassed by their sincere Catholic dedication to Teach the TRUTH of the FAITH as once taught by all the Saints and Scholars for centuries. AND YES THEY KNOW THE DIFFERENCE!

    They are tired of these unintelligent "Wanna- be Chapel Cardinals" Selling their Snake Oil to unsuspecting souls who are trying their best to serve God. Instead, they are getting duped into Supporting these Sanctimonious Soothsayers Seeking their Savings

    Will any picture solve that problem?

    If you answer yes, then my friend, you do not belong on this Blog. You do not want to be informed, you want the Reader to Perform, by Posting a Selfie, so your curiosity can be satisfied. This reeks of the old saying that "seeing is believing."
    SGG has a great constant Show going on to entertain all those souls, who would rather SEE, than BELIEVE.

    "Blessed are they who have not seen, and yet believe"

    Beware the old saying about the "Cat and Curiosity."

    I suggest if you still want a PIC that you Go to a Blog that weighs in on your Natural, rather than your Supernatural attributes.

    1. You sound very serious.

      Where is your humour?

    2. Anon 3:27 AM.

      Ah, the Saints and one of them is St John Vianney . . .

      "If we had faith, we should discern God hidden in the person of the Priest, like a light behind a glass."

    3. To discern God, the man has to be a genuine Roman Catholic priest. Otherwise it might be the devil behind hidden in a dark room behind an iron door.

  18. AnonymousSeptember 29, 2016 at 3:46 AM


    "You sound very serious.

    Where is your humour?"

    I left my Humor back at SGG when they betrayed a humble sub-deacon and teacher that they called FRIEND for over 30 years.
    Now I am very serious trying to undo the damage they have done to the innocent Parishioners, especially the Children.

    However, I do get a good educated charge whenever I read this BLOG. Not only is it informative, it is down right intellectually inspiring.

    In my sphere of friends this is the kind of entertainment we enjoy. Learning while laughing, great for the body and soul.

    Oh what those idiots would PAY for a Staff like P.L. Imagine, all those mind twisting ideas on how to raise funds from the dead would cease to exist, if they could Host A Live Saturday Night Theological Roast.

    How's that for a sense of humor?

  19. AnonymousSeptember 29, 2016 at 4:34 AM
    Anon 3:27 AM.

    "Ah, the Saints and one of them is St John Vianney . . ."

    "If we had faith, we should discern God hidden in the person of the Priest, like a light behind a glass."

    St. John Vianney was in no way, one who would require much discernment. He was hardly a flickering light behind a Glass. His Zeal for God was more like an inferno of fire that could light the world.
    That's why the devil hated him!
    His life radiated the burning Faith he had in his heart for God.
    He lived a very austere, hard rigid life of constant self sacrificing for the conversion of his parishioners for God.

    His faithful new that this Saint Practiced what he Preached,and discernment was real easy in this case.

    He hated the devil as much as the devil hated him.

    Could you imagine Bishop Dolan, the wimp of wimps, with his Sinus woes sleeping on a stone floor with a rock for a pillow, like the Cure of Ars did?

    I don't think so!

    You can have all the Faith you want. IF the priest is not the servant of God, then he is the servant of another, like a Judas. Christ Himself said of this traitor, " It would have been better had he never been born."

    Most of these priests today, should have never been ordained, and if today had been yesteryear, they would not.

    Pray for Good Priests, they are out there.

    1. They indeed are, but you have to look hard, and they don't belong to any of the "bishop"-led cults.

  20. Hi, PL,

    Julie and Ahuva again! We're now in Latin III.

    Last week an anonymous poster thought you guys could write a Latin poem about "Discipline Donnie's" cult problems. He wrote a funny quatrain and you answered with a limerick but we haven't seen your Latin elegy yet. Did we miss it?

    1. How about you both convert to Catholicism? Have the Readers here ever told you that you must, if you wish to be saved?

    2. You girls might want to hold off on that invitation until Catholics figure out where the Church is. You won't find the faith in the cults of Tradistan or in the Novus Ordo. If you're interested, talk to an SSPX priest.

    3. Hello, Ladies,

      Good to hear from you again.

      No, you didn't miss our effort because nobody else followed up with 9/20 6:51's suggestion for a verse contest about Big Don's dilemmas in Swampland.

      But, since you're interested, here's a bit of freshly, though perhaps too hastily, composed Latin doggerel we think describes the mess all traddies face when they appear have hope of getting rid of a rotten cult master. (Aren't you glad you're not one of them?)

      We chose the elegiac distich because it's self-contained and lends itself to epigram, like a limerick or the commenter's quatrain. As you'll note from the trisyllabic ending in the pentameter, we're more Catullan than Ovidian, and our use of cleros is patently not classical.

      With sincere apologies to the Muses, then, here's our offering (sorry Blogger won't allow us to indent the second line):

      Quid stomacho removere pedes clerosve vagantes
      Prodest cum rapide tunc alii veniunt?

      You two may want to work it out as literally as possible for the practice, but here's our equally bathetic versified translation as a guide:

      Why angrily pluck errant priests or lice
      When next another shows up in a trice?

  21. Cekada just published his second response to S&S.

    Another great video.

    1. Too bad they didn't get a video of him walking naked in front of those boys at his swim club a few years back. That would've made a great video too.

    2. What's the evidence for that claim? Just the word of the Lotarski boys?

    3. Anon 9/29 1:53 PM

      S & S will skewer Checkie for this blundering reply.

      Yes, it is a great video -- great for laughs at how inept that idiot is. S & S will have a field day with this adolescent nonsense. We're ready for the action!

    4. It's full of Fr Tony's usual visual gimmicks, so a waste paper basket when talking about Messrs Salza and Siscoe. He really likes to answer by fixing on some vocabulary used or definition, rather than the substance fo the argument. A thread on one forum has him demand an exact example of a canonist using 'pertinacious heretic.' No response when an example of an exact use of the term was given. No effort to answer the S&S paper by, dunno, penning his own. Another video. His métier seems to be childishness and triviality, more like a commentary vlogger than the serious scholar priest he poses as. What keeps him from writing an article, even a short article in answer?

    5. He's no priest scholar, and the fact that he cannot answer S&S in writing condemns his effort to the same wastebasket to which he assigned S&S's work.

    6. The Reader said: He's no priest scholar, and the fact that he cannot answer S&S in writing condemns his effort to the same wastebasket to which he assigned S&S's work.

      This should be settled in writing to avoid any attempts at sophistry, especially the sophistry present in modern video production.

      I suggest the commenter should read Pius XII's 1957 Encyclical Miranda Prorsus about the power of video productions (yes, Pius XII was originally addressing immoral Hollywood films but the principles still hold). The viewer lets down their intellectual guard under the guise of entertainment. This sentiment is even echoed by the US Army Strategic Studies Institute paper The Mind Has No Firewall albeit under a much different set of guiding principles.

  22. Would somebody please send me the link to the

    "Howdy Dowdy Show". I had no idea another video was was out there in Cyber-Space.

    Well, God Bless his little heart, and minute MIND!

  23. You mean Fr Checkie's latest bit of performance art (btw is it so hard for him to write a few hundred words of prose)?

    1. Yes, he's incapable of writing a reasoned reply in academically acceptable prose. Even if he could, he wouldn't because then he'd expose his arguments to withering scrutiny. That's why he prefers the smoke and mirrors of amateur video replies where he thinks he can play fast and loose with the argument. But even sedes will see the fallacy in his failed rebuttal of Billot's thesis.

  24. Compare the 'flamboyant' (in the intro to TOFP) Fr Checkie to, say, Bishop Michel-Louis Guérard des Lauriers OP. Here was a genuine sedevacantist (or sedeprivationist, a one time Sinburn position) priest scholar. Here was a Professor and Papal Confessor who was theologian, Latinist and mathematician. Fr Tony does Youtube videos. I can get how someone might have limited Latin when he commenced his studies for the priesthood, but he has had years to give himself the expertise he still lacks.

    1. How right you are that Checkie has squandered the opportunity to get decent Latin over the years. By his own admission, he was a poor Latin student when younger, but, as you suggest, he could have overcome his disabilities to a large extent with hard work.

      Allow us, in passing, also to mention des Lauriers' participation as lecteur en theologie in approving the worthiness for publication of several volumes of the Éditions du Cerf translation of the Summa in the 1940s. We'll bet he would have been embarrassed at Checkie's blatant attempt to associate himself with so great a name.