Saturday, April 1, 2017

馃幎AND ALWAYS LET YOUR CONSCIENCE BE YOUR GUIDE馃幎



In morality we are as sure as in mathematics. Whichcote

In last week's post, we mentioned how Tradistani kingpins misuse the sermon format to dupe their unsophisticated followers into believing malformed sede "clergy" are Catholic. Week in, week out, the laity are awash in a foul stream of syrupy platitudes or graphic pulpit-porn disingenuously represented as explaining the principles of the faith. Since the message comes from men more or less dressed like Latin-rite clergy, cultlings assume it's true.

That truckling assent affords the cult masters a singular immunity when adversaries array sound Catholic arguments against their reign of error: the weekly "sermons" have conditioned cult victims to dismiss anything in conflict with their Svengalis' self-interested rants. To the overly inquisitive, the so-called bishops, without substantiation, reflexively accuse "our enemies" of wicked misinterpretation, and that's that! The thoroughly programmed cultlings then automatically turn a deaf ear to the voice of authentic Catholic teaching.

Consequently, if you want to get through to cultists who can be salvaged — and, yes, Mr. and Mrs. Trad America, such specimens do exist (which explains Dannie's current crisis) — you must appeal to a religiously neutral ethical system: It's your only hope of bringing the dazed creatures to their senses. As we indicated last week, the Readers believe they've found such a model. In every way, it's compatible with Christian normative values, while its intuitiveness lets Everyman come immediately to an actionable conclusion about these ecclesiastical buccaneers.

The ethical principles we have in mind, at once both simple and profound, are from the pen of a great 20th-century scholar of Aristotle, the academic philosopher W. D. Ross.* He believed a moral theory should "fit the facts," which are the "convictions of thoughtful and well-educated people." Although he wrote from a secular perspective, he wasn't by any means a relativist. According to him,
The moral order...is just as much part of the fundamental nature of the universe (and...of any possible universe in which there are moral agents at all) as is the spatial or numerical structure expressed in the axioms of geometry or arithmetic.
At the center of Ross's thinking rests what he identified as seven distinct prima facie duties, i.e., entirely real and self-evident fundamental rules governing interpersonal relationships.  (N.B. He never asserted the list was complete or hierarchical. ) Here they are in their usual order along with brief definitions, although definitions are unnecessary — decent people already know what they mean, for these convictions have been their own since childhood:
1. Fidelity: We must keep our promises and honor our contracts, be honest and truthful, and not engage in deception.
2. Reparation: We must make up for injuries we have done to others.
3. Gratitude: We must be grateful to others for their benefactions, and we should strive to return favors for the previous favors others have done for us.
4. Non-injury (Non-malfeasance): We must not intentionally, negligently, or ignorantly harm others either physically or psychologically.
5. Beneficence: We must do good to others and nurture their health, happiness, security, wisdom, moral goodness, and well-being.
6. Self-Improvement: We must improve our own condition with respect to virtue and intelligence.
7. Justice: We must distribute both benefits and burdens fairly and, at the same time, prevent unjust distributions to the unworthy.
We think you'll agree the theory is simplicity itself: it's the common-sense, everyday morality a plain man or woman understands with ease. None of the numerous trespasses posted here or on other blogs could've occurred had traddie laymen lived by Ross's code. Indeed, his duties are so clear that cult "clergy" could never have claimed they alone possess the competence to decide their meaning or determine their application.

Under Ross's ethical model, it's obvious, therefore, that there'd be no room for the moral scourge of mental reservation, the "clergy's" disreputable license to lie. The "priest" who lost a lawsuit to a young woman he impregnated wouldn't have filed for bankruptcy to escape paying court-ordered damages.  (And if he did, a morally centered laity would never allow him to work in a traditional chapel again.) If a sede miscreant had let a layman buy him a winter coat on the promise of reimbursement, the "cleric," when reminded weeks later of his debt, could not have told the gentleman to pay himself back from the collection basket. When a chapel member bequeathed funds for the erection of a shrine, "priests" couldn't have delayed fulfilling the deceased's wishes until incensed chapel members prevailed in court. Furthermore, no kingpin would've dared tell one of the faithful that working for a competitor of a major cult benefactor was "taking bread out of my mouth": The man and his family would've been spared a ruinous, out-of-state move.

With Ross as his guide, no layman would've countenanced a "priest's" condoning the gruesome judicial murder of Terri Schiavo. Upon hearing the first reports from the distressed teachers at $GG $chool, all Gertries, not just the parents, would've intervened on behalf of defenseless children and secured the removal of "The Principal"; under no circumstances would that parasite have been able to continue to sponge off the chapel's resources for another eight or nine long years. Likewise, the generosity of the laity could never be abused by the cult masters' expensive trips abroad or sojourns at luxury desert spas. And most certainly, cynical "clergy" wouldn't have dared call such wasteful expenditures "apostolates" or "pilgrimages." Finally, after some 40 years, "priests" and "bishops" would know Latin inside out, so there'd be no perverse translations of infallible papal teaching on their websites.They also would've learned during those four decades to write academic English prose.

But you don't need to re-read PL's many pages exposing "clerical" bad behavior. (Most of you have enough disturbing memories of your own.) Nor need you give Jiminy Cricket a little whistle or scratch your head over the moral theologians' Scholastic idiom, which the cult masters smugly tell you means something different from what it plainly says. Just recall the transgressions you've witnessed or heard reported — the monstrous abuses that offended your sense of the right and the good — and then give Ross's seven principles a little once over.

It shouldn't take very long to feel moral outrage rising from your breast, provided you haven't been robbed of your conscience. In which case, if you still belong to a Tradistani cult but now are overcome with righteous indignation, you'll take your money and run.

STARVE THE BEAST. RESTORE DECENCY TO TRADWORLD.


* Sir William David Ross (1877-1971), an Oxford don and administrator, served as the general editor of the monumental Aristotle translation series (popularly called the "Oxford."). He not only translated some of the volumes in the series, notably the Nichomachean Ethics, but he also produced editions in Greek of important texts in the Aristotelian corpus.  Ross's commentary accompanying his revised Greek text of the Prior Analytics merits careful reading by every serious student of the assertoric syllogism.

29 comments:

  1. Islam is conquering the Western World due to no education,illiteracy,and blind faith in their religion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, Tradistan has the similar defects, but it's losing. Maybe it's because their followers have blind faith in their leaders and not in their religion.

      Delete
    2. I hold the sedevacantist position and I do not have blind faith in man.
      You could be correct but why isn't your FSSP ICKSP SSPX conquering the world like Islam and Judaism?
      Why is the Western World not listening to Freemasonic Tax Attorney John Salza?
      Not being sarcastic as this issue affects everyone of us,including every group and individual we discussed.

      Delete
    3. By design, the West has lost its faith. It will take more than all these man-centered factions to restore Christian hegemony.

      Delete
  2. I agree with you BUT Catholicism is not man centered.
    There are sedevacantist and
    SSPX-Resistance clergy who have the faith.Not all of us worship man,I promise you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is one reason I suggested Bishop Giles Butler Franciscans in Union,KY.They have the faith and are active in your area.
      How can a man be educated by an higher institute of Catholic learning if he is being taught by the very men who destroyed Catholic hegemony?
      Bishop Vezelis was active in forming priests in South Korea pre and post Vatican 2.
      Agree or disagree at least their founding bishop had a history and learning and working within the Roman system.

      Delete
    2. 7:47: Our dilemma is this: how can any group that doesn't have a commission from the Church not be man centered? We've only seen a few independents who have the discipline and the courage merely to offer the sacraments and steadfastly eschew the trappings that belong only to the institutional Church. Without such holy restraint, it's a slippery slope leading to cults of the personality and arrogation of rights and powers that have never been bestowed. YFrom your testimony, you may be one of the lucky Catholics who is served by one of these virtuous souls.

      7:52: Agreed that Vezelis had come from "The System." The problem is with others who, no matter how able and enthusiastic, have never been part of The System. It folkways and mores cannot be efficiently transferred by independent study or one-on-one tutoring.

      We can tell you that even those formerly NO priests who leave and embrace the traditionalist cause are far superior to the sedes because they experienced directly "The System."

      Yes, there have been huge changes since V II, but ancient organizations do not lose all the old ethos. There is a core that perdures. That's one of the reasons the formation within the FSSP or SSPX (at least after the mid '70s) will always be several orders of magnitude better than anything offered by the radical independents.

      Note that we must exclude Tradzilla, "One-Hand," and Checkie as having had real experience in "The System." When they completed 脡c么ne in the mid '70s, it was still in its infancy. Like all start ups, it had not yet found its footing or direction. Then they left the society before it had recaptured much of the Roman Way. For that reason, the younger priests of the Nine are a breed apart from the cult masters, in spite of their early separation from the SSPX. And it goes without saying that those coming from Winona are light years ahead of the first vanguard of Americans.

      Now all this doesn't mean we think no one can be trained to serve as an independent "priest" and offer the sacraments. We think it can be done. It's just we should never mistake these men for the real thing. But they can never be more than a simplex.

      Delete
    3. "Our dilemma is this:how can any group that doesn't have a commission from the Church not be man centered?"
      The supreme Law of the Church is salvation of souls.
      Concerning independent clergy,Jesus Christ said he'd be with us until the end of time.The only place to receive Jesus Christ body blood soul divinity is Holy Communion.
      If you think we can't receive Jesus Christ through holy Communion and must boycott independent churches,we are calling Jesus Christ a liar.
      We all have preferences but there is has and been so much ecumenical Jewish Islamic Antichrist heresy in the Novus Ordo plus the new doubtful rite of holy orders,I will avoid and reject the New Order.(Novus Ordo)
      I say this in all due respect.This is not an attempt to change the World but giving our side (Sede SSPX Rezistance) of the debate.

      Delete
    4. 10:58

      You must not have read our last paragraph in the comment above, or you would have seen we dio not advocate boycotting independent chapels.

      We would, however, urge all to be very careful when going to a sede chapel. The training is usually substandard (especially in the "bishop"-led cults), and in the case of "One Hand" and the men he's ordained, there's real doubt about their validity. Nevertheless, we recognize that there are some very good sedes out there who are not affiliated with the "bishop"-led cults. In fact, we count many among our friends and have assisted at their Masses.

      Delete
    5. Bishop Vezelis could pass down the Roman System the same way Bishop Bernie can and the only difference is Bishop Vezelis lived and breathed the Roman system for 25 yrs.Bishop Bernie is just now entering the Roman system after 35 yrs of being in an independent system.
      I understand what you're saying but the men who taught at Econe in the 70's were from the Church pre-1962.The SPX priests who went in the 70's were taught by Fr.Des Lauriers.He helped write the document of the Assumption of the BVM.
      Not being rude but your hatred of Bp.Dolan Bp.Sanborn can blind your reasoning.You all are very educated and I respect that.

      Delete
    6. A word about Gu茅rard des Lauriers. First, we agree that he was a superbly well-trained, brilliant theologian and scholar. (We're particularly impressed with his r么le in the 脡ditions du Cerf's translation of the Summa.)

      However, let us tell you what we have heard from priests who were at 脡c么ne in the early years. By that time, des Lauriers was of advanced age, and even the francophones said his lectures were barely intelligible. We don't expect these Americans who were still struggling with French got too much out of the lectures. Moreover, the general disdain in which the Americans at the time were held suggests that the great man would hardly have made any one of them his prot茅g茅.

      As for our animus toward "One Hand" and Tradzilla, it is not hatre. It's more like holy contempt. And that contempt has sharpened, not dulled our reasoning. What we present here are facts and the conclusions that necessarily flow from those facts. We see them clearly for who they are, and we warn others to stay away or get out for their own good.

      Delete
    7. I don't enjoy going on what others tell me,especially about something from 40 years ago.

      Delete
  3. Whoa! I'm fairly new to these controversies, so please forgive and link back if my questions have already been addressed, but did SGG admit a priest in their ranks who fathered a child and use parish funds to assist him in the legal dispute with the woman? The use of perjoitatve pseudonyms, though amusing, can be difficult for us noobs. It took me a long time to figure out who the jellyfish is, for example.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No. The creep we referred to was in MI at the time. He had returned there after a stint in prison. You may find our post about the lawsuit here.

    We've posted keys to the sobriquets several times, but it won't hurt to do it again. Since you already guessed the identity of the loathsome Long Island Jellyfish, here are the main ones:

    The Clone, the Kid, Junior, "bishop"-elect = Selway
    Tradzilla, the Donster, Big Don, Sinburn = Sanborn
    "OneHand" = Dolan
    Checkie, Cheeseburger, Cheeseball, Checkmeister, Blunderer = Cekada
    Toady = Palma
    Scut the Prefect = Desp贸sito
    Squirmin' Herman = Fliess
    Uneven Steven = McKenna
    Lurch = McGuire
    The Forlorn Finn = Lehtoranta

    "Dirtbag Dan," "Dannie," "Wee Dan, " "Li'l Daniel," "Donnie" and the like shouldn't give any trouble.

    The various antonomastic references (e.g., His Excremency etc.) are usually to Dannie. Those that apply to the Jellyfish use the neuter possessive "Its" (e.g., Its Gelatinouscy).

    We know the epithets present a challenge to newcomers, but we think they're fun and capture the essence of the clowns we blog about.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You forgot Pivmiester...admittedly easy.

    I am aware that you recognize the Thuc line as valid, but is there any reason why you (all?) single them out for ridicule? In my very brief sojourn to a SSPV chapel I gathered they are almost as deserving of such criticism. Or was I too hasty in my judgement?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, you're right, there are other names we omitted, such as "The Skipper," known elsewhere as "Oscar the Weiner," the idiot in MI who skipped the consecration in the canon one Sunday and then blamed the laity for making him work too hard. But those names are the main ones.

      We have very little experience with the SSPV, so, like Wittgenstein, what we cannot speak about, we pass over in silence. We are, however, very familiar with the SW Ohio/Brooksville/Michigan cult cabal and their history. Our principal mission is to warn people to stay away from these religious entrepreneurs. If you read enough back posts, you'll note that, although we do use ridicule to bring home our message and to demythologize the cult masters, the content is based on direct observation and fact.

      Thus we didn't just say Checkie's Latin is dreadful or his book was a disgrace: we proved it on any number of occasions (especially our demonstration of his perverse mistranslation of infallible papal teaching and our documentation in 2010 of the myriad shameful errors in WHH).

      As for our bottom-line position on episcopal orders, we really advocate multiple lineages, just to be on the safe side. You never know when the other shoe might drop.

      Note, too, that we have trouble with some sublineages from Th峄. For instance, if Dannie were ever to consecrate, we could never accept the candidate as valid owing to the problem of his one-handed priestly orders; he would have to be ordained and consecrated conditionally before we could feel comfortable with orders from him. Similarly, anyone only in the line through Slupski is suspect: we've heard too many frightening tales of sloppy ordinations to ever feel even moderately safe with anyone he has ordained or consecrated.

      Delete
    2. Do you folk have any idea how many ordinations Slupski has done?When you say sloppy,what do you mean?Is it they lacked any training or were unworthy.Bet they are both.

      Delete
    3. We have no idea, but the number must be very large.

      When we wrote sloppy, we meant the manner in which the rites were carried out. At one, he himself was holding the book when he was supposed to be imposing handS! Witnesses to another ordination were shocked at the disorder.

      We would advise conditional orders in all cases.

      If we had to bet, we'd agree with you that many were poorly trained and unworthy.

      Delete
    4. Have you been to a Ordination involving Bishop Slupski?
      Or are you going on what you have "heard" from other people?

      Delete
    5. I know people who have known Bishop Slupski for decades.
      He was ordained in 1961 and is NOT a stupid ignorant man.
      His associates have told me the internet has horrible incorrect gossip about him.
      Bishop Slupski doesn't respond to the false rumors for one reason.
      His attitude is
      "The Lord knows the truth.If someone has a question for me,I will answer it,if its a rumor,so be it,I will not concern myself"

      Delete
  6. Do you folk have any info on that new CMRI group in MN?Are they from the SSPV or Novus Ordo?

    Yes,in total agreement that the Pivmiester is a clown as well.Some of the stories heard about some of the clowns he has ordained is a joke.He has no standards either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No new info yet. We recently had a report that the CMRI had established a mission very near Dannie's. That may explain why we haven't heard much from him about MN lately. One unconfirmed communication said there had been a major disagreement last year. However, we can't go into more detail because we've been unable to get documentation, and we won't post until we're sure. For instance, we had heard of Tradzilla's ouster well before we posted, but we waited until we got a copy of Pivvy's letter before our announcement.

      Delete
  7. A traditionalist priest, a tragic death, and a lawsuit
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1160060/posts

    ReplyDelete
  8. This week’s Bishop’s Corner comes to you as an “in-flight edition.” I am on my way back on Thursday morning from Tampa, having assisted at †Kathleen Sanborn’s funeral on Wednesday. Fr. Cekada served as MC, I gave the eulogy, Fr. Desposito was deacon and seminarian Mr. Philip Eldracher from Michigan, subdeacon, and Fr. Selway, Assistant Priest. Fr. Thomas Zapp came from California, and Fr. Dennis McMahon drove all the way from New York, a two-day trip.

    http://www.sgg.org/2013/08/31/pentecost-xv-5/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, indeed. That's the scumbag who almost brought down the whole thing, and yet he's back in the fold (though he still must fly under the radar.) That should say more than PL ever could.

      A pity the poor woman's attorney wasn't more aggressive during discovery. Had he been, it would have been all over.

      Delete
    2. Very telling is a July 2004 article from the West Roxbury, MA, Transcript, which reported on this dirtbag's resignation from the chapel there when they learned about his brushes with the law.

      It reported that a board member said that during the hiring they consulted with priests from around the country who recommended him. The same member affirmed that "If we found out [about his past], we would have hauled him out in two seconds."

      This is the problem with Tradistan: there was and is a conspiracy among the dirtbag "clergy" to rehabilitate this crudball. In the past, he's even been invited to the priests' retreat in Mt. Vernon, WA. The laity in NY who keep him employed must be depraved, for they certainly know the sordid story that Apr 4 9:27 linked. (Click HERE to read it again.)

      Delete
    3. What happened to Fr Vaillancourt and the Sister who left CMRI with him; what are they doing nowadays?

      Delete
    4. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

      Delete
  9. I am interested in seeing some replies to Anonymous April 13, 2017 at 9:11 PM

    Anyone?

    ReplyDelete