Saturday, June 17, 2017


I've got a little list — I've got a little list... Gilbert and Sullivan's The Mikado

After the self-elected "Superior General" announced his new "Institute" back in April,  PL expected him to follow up with more commentary on his directories. After all, he did write "To be continued" on p. 12 of the newsletter supplement. We also assumed he'd be reporting on swelling membership rolls. With all the fanfare and hoopla of the April announcement ("We hope and pray that the Institute will grow in the future, and that God will bless its undertakings"), it wasn't unreasonable to anticipate a rush of enlistees, at least from the sycophants who wanted their names on the "List of Approved Clergy."

Think of our disappointment when not a syllable about the "Institute" appeared in the pesthouse's May newsletter. (The post nominal initials R.C.I. don't even follow Tradzilla's name in the signature block.) In any new venture, the smart practice is to keep up the buzz with frequent progress reports. Does the Donster's silence here imply the grand initiative has, like so many self-defeating cult-master daydreams, fallen flat? Or worse, has the sought-after divine benediction been withheld?

Insofar as Big Don's being coy and won't tell us, we'll have to launch our own investigation into why the "Instritute" seems to have stalled just after it got started. To do that, we need the assistance of YOUR eyes and ears and enquiring minds.

Below is a select list of indie trad levites, which a correspondent helped us put together. None of the individuals, we think, has any formal or quasi-formal affiliation with the Big Kahuna's direct competitors, e.g., SSPX, the Resistance, SSPV, FSSP, CMRI, Society of King Louis of France, Society of Jesus and Mary, etc. (Tell us if we're mistaken on that score.) We've also taken pains to omit the names of individuals suspected of  over-leaning toward the SSPX or openly hostile to or noisily contemptuous of Tradzilla. (For the latter, that's a huge number, BTW. If we considered the internal forum, it might be close to universal.)

Many on the list have, or have had, more than a nodding acquaintance with the "Superior General," and, although each one may not be a rabid sede, none seems to hold an ecclesial position repugnant to his. (Correct us if we're wrong, please!) Furthermore, a few are pesthouse completers, two are former pesthouse associates, while others were members of "The Nine." In sum, each individual could be a candidate for membership in the Flushing Rat's "Roman Catholic Institute."

  1. Ahern, Daniel
  2. Andrade, Paul
  3. Berry, Eugene
  4. Cekada, Anthony
  5. Collins, Joseph
  6. Dolan, Daniel
  7. Dolan, Patrick
  8. Ércoli, Carlos
  9. Finnegan, Terrence
10. Hall, Bernard
11. Hecquard, Guillaume
12. Hogan, John
13. Jacqmin, Eric
14. Larrabee, Julian
15. LeGal, Thomas
16. Lehtoranta, Vili
17. LeMay, Peter
18. McGuire, Charles
19. McKenna, Stephen
20. McMahon, Denis
21. Moylan, Marcellus
22. Neville, Robert
23. Nkamuke, Bede
24. Ramolla, Markus
25. Ricossa, Francesco
26. Saavedra, Oscar
27. Siordia, Jaime
28. Stuyver, Geert Jan
29. Trauner, Arnold
30. Zapp, Thomas

Now the question we'd like answered is this:

How many of these apparently viable candidates for Tradzilla's new "Institute" have actually signed on

Out of 30 names, surely 20% (6), or even 10% (a paltry 3), must've answered the rector's call, don't you think? At a minimum, the Skipper (#26), Wannabe (#14) and My-Way Carlito (#8) must've joined up — Skippy for sure — right? If MR. WORLDWIDE can't recruit those three guys, then whom can he get? That is to say, if they're not onboard, then the "Institute" is dead in the water, and PL will have to change its thinking on one important matter.

Now, here's where you come in. Read over the list. If you know one of these men has enlisted, tell us in the comments section, even if Big Don rejected his application. Then the Readers will know Sin-burn hasn't completely lost his grip over trad "clergy." That's important to us because we're trying to revise our prediction about when the Kid will get his miter. We had thought he would have received it by now, but it looks as though the long-awaited event depends on whether Tradzilla can get the "Institute" afloat.

If no one else wants to join Big Don's "Fight Club," then we don't see how B'ville can possibly have two "bishops" in the compound's garage (unless the pampered priory princesses are to get their very own prelataster). It's safe to say that an "auxiliary bishop" would make the Florida cultlings look ridiculous in Sedelandia's eyes. Without anywhere to go, Tradzilla will have to stay put while Junior will have to keep wearing his sour face and priest's cassock in the group portraits appearing in the newsletter.

We surmise that, at best, only Skippy has scrambled to join, but that's as good as zero new members. (By skipping the consecration at Mass, he's become the poster child for malformation in TradWorld. Not the kind of klutz self-regarding sede "liturgiphiles" want to hang out with, is he?)  As we see it, a lot of prospective candidates appear to be running for their lives to get away from the "Superior General." Others would seem to be flipping him an extremely impolite hand gesture.

If no new members materialize soon, the Readers'll be able to consign the "Institute" to the ash heap of trad history along with Don's big $30K plan and his planned takeover of Our Lady of the Sun.

Then we'll look for signs of mayhem in the fetid swamp as a resentful élite chafe at Junior's denied birthright.


  1. Since MHT seminarians were announcing in videos last fall that they had already signed on to the institute (at least for a time) and in the info published in May there were no add'l members besides them, how do you not figure Sanborn didn't already invite all those priests to join his group (like last October), but even though not receiving any responses went ahead and announced this institute in May because he figures he needs one to compete w/CMRI/SSPV & SSPX (i.e. that's why he lost Arizona)? [Although as you point out it is not very astute to not even mention the institute a month later or use the initials etc.] If he had launched a collegial effort to discuss might have been more successful, but seems to just have announced it as his baby, w/him in charge so why would any of these priests want to come under his big foot? Also while not mentioned wonder if there is a financial cost to belonging to said institute ('ministrative costs y'know).

    1. It's very probable he did invite others and they turned him down flat.

  2. What benefits are there for signing up? It seems like a good number of rules and obedience to their leader (aka Sanborn), but what are they achieving in joining this group? You have to pledge an oath that you will obey even how your church will be decorated. That seems pretty petty. The cult tends to test obedience and allegiance with petty things like this, even to their parishioners. It is quite sad.

    1. We can;'t see any benefits either, other than he promises the "Institute" will support it members. But with what money? From the looks of it, he can't repair the crumbling pesthouse.

      This is just another pipe dream soon about to vanish into thin air.

  3. "BTW. If we considered the internal forum, it might be close to universal."

    How would you be able to consider the internal forum, being that it is internal?

    1. We didn't, that's why we used a conditional conjunction and the auxiliary with subjunctive force in the apodosis. The hypothesis was based on what we know to be many of the "clergy's" private opinion of the Donster. In private, he's an object of contempt or a laughing stock to many outside his pesthouse crew.

  4. Does anyone know how much Australia net can be attributed to Dolan due to the Omlor connection? Although another factor:

    1. A good question. But we think the Omlor clan has $GG's number and therefore looked to the Swampland.


      Looks like a great book! Have any of you read it?

    3. Among all the Readers, we've probably read many of the articles anthologized in the book. (We certainly wouldn't pay $99 to read them now.) From what we've read, we'd call them interesting and thought provoking but not great, a classification we would reserve for an effort from a professionally trained canonist and theologian.

      Although we are not among those who credit the author with the sole discovery of the pro multis invalidity problem (one of us heard a similar critique in a college lecture before the publication of QTV), we give the author high marks for alerting the laity to the problems with the all-English canon. In those years, priests kept their reservations to themselves or only shared them in confidence.

      As an aside, we must note with regret how sedes damage their cause by making their own errors in Latin. In the link you provided, the author of the foreword to the book writes,

      "It was, as it were, the 'et tenebrae facta sunt' of Calvary once again." (Bold emphasis ours.)

      It should have read factae as in Lk 23:44 in the Vulgate (+ Mt 27:45 & Mk 15:33) and at the responsory to lesson v in Good-Friday Matins. The word tenebrae is fem. pl., not neuter.

      Maybe that was just a typo made by the ad's copywriter, but such an error hardly instils confidence about a book treating of a problem in the translation of a Latin original. (If the error appears in the printed book, the publishers owe the purchasers a refund of some sort.)

    4. Thanks to Mr. Hutton Gibson, Catholics can get the book online for free:

    5. Thanks very much for the link.

    6. To our great dismay, the bad Latin comes from the book's foreword and was not a transcription error in producing the ad.

      But at least Gene has provided the book for free.

  5. Reader, it is absurd in the extreme to claim that the publishers owe the purchasers a refund of some sort, if a minor error like that appears in the foreword to the book.

    Surely you are not serious.

    1. No, not entirely. It's just wishful thinking, we suppose.

      We're simply tired of seeing all these elementary errors in Latin from people who claim to be defenders of the Latin liturgy. Perhaps if there were some monetary penalty for all these blunders, trad publishers would get proofreaders who actually know the language. In this arena, errors or typos in Latin text are far more serious than errors or typos in English.

      Our exasperation was compounded when we realized that the error might have appeared in a book that argues against a mistranslation of Latin. Who can take such a work seriously if the editors don't take pains to assure that every Latin word it contains is correct?

      Checkie's many, many errors in Latin, which PL has assiduously documented, have rendered his œuvre worthless. Educated trads cannot have confidence in anything he writes. We, therefore, cannot understand why other pro-Latin-Mass polemicists expose themselves to the same risk by failing to make sure the Latin they print is letter perfect, especially when the text comes from Sacred Scripture and/or the liturgy.

    2. Alas, it goes back to the Vatican II Council. Many of its defenders spoke haltingly in Latin while the proponents of the vernacular expresses themselves in glorious Ciceronian periods.

      At least that was said to be so, I've never been so in need of sleep as to wade into the documentation.

    3. That would make an interesting research topic for an insomniac. But even those tongue-tied defenders of Latin were light years ahead of the cult masters in their mastery of the language.

    4. This reminds me of what was said about Cardinal McIntyre, who got known during the Council as linguae Latinae optimus defensor, pessimus exemplar. Nonetheless, after studying the Acta of the Council extensively, I couldn't say that the conservative Fathers were especially inapt in speaking Latin, in fact, some of the most proficient Latinists were part of or associated with the Coetus, whereas some of the leading progressive theologians were unable to take part in the discussions because of the "language barrier".

    5. "Many of its defenders spoke haltingly in Latin while the proponents of the vernacular expresses themselves in glorious Ciceronian periods."

      I'm dubious. Maximos IV addressed the aula in French.

    6. But didn't the patriarch argue in favor of using the vernacular, urging the Roman Church to employ the languages of it various communities in its liturgies?

      In such a situation, it's easy to see why he'd use a modern language to make his case before the council Fathers.

    7. I'm not sure whether arguing for a universal law in favor of using particular vernacular languages while employing one particular language which might not be intelligible to all Fathers and certainly isn't the vernacular of the place ... is such a brilliant idea.

      In any way, the presiding Cardinal should have told him the same thing this one old French priest told an American youngster who asked with a broad accent:
      "Ubinam possum dicere missam?"

      "Si vis loqui latine, forsan potero tibi respondere."

    8. Maybe Tarquinius can tell us whether the protocols explicitly permitted the use of French at the council (owing to its recognition as a language of international diplomacy).

    9. The Ordo Concilii Oecumenici Vaticani II celebrandi is very clear in chapter V, De Lingua in Concilio adhibenda: CAPUT VI

      Art. 28
      (Lingua in Sessionibus publicis, in Congregationibus generalibus, in Tribunali administrativo, in actis adhibenda)

      In Sessionibus publicis, in Congregationibus generalibus, in Tribunali administrativo et in actis exarandis lingua latina adhibetur; quo autem eius usus expeditior evadat, praesto sunt lectores, interpretes ac translatores.

      Art. 29
      (Lingua in Commissionibus adhibenda)

      In Commissionum disceptationibus praeter latinam linguam adhiberi possunt communiores linguae vernaculae, sed quae iis linguis expressa sunt, statim in linguam latinam sunt vertenda.

      As you can clearly see in the Acta Synodalia, the Patriarch was speaking in a (or rather the fifth) General Session:

      But making use of French, let me tell you this, surely was the least impious thing the blessed Patriarch did.

      Of course, Latin proved to be a problem even for the locals. When Card. Godfrey made the statement "Debemus levare linguam Latinam", the Italian press made the almost Cekadesque error of translating it as "we must abolish the Latin language"!

    10. Many thanks to the very learned and always well informed Tarquinius. Nice anecdote about the Italian Fourth Estate.

      His Beatitude's attitude to all things certainly reflected the authority-hating '60s. Rome, like all other craven power centers of that era, allowed itself to be insulted.

  6. Out of your list of 30 men who might or might not consider joining the Institute Mill of Has Been Sanborn, there is one, who will definitely not be joining. That you can take to the bank! So for your record, you can delete one, and make your number 29 for your alleged viable candidates for The Flushing Rats Nest of RUG RATS.

    Great Reading!


    Doesn't "THE INSTITUTE" have some kind of an odd similarity to the 1970's movie COMA? Where certain candidates were put into a COMA and then brought to THE INSTITUTE. They were kept on life support to sell off their body parts to the highest bidder.

    1. We've received several e-mails assuring us of other men who absolutely, positively would never join Big Don's boys' club. With your assurance, our little list has gotten even smaller.

      A very apt allusion to the movie. Anybody who would join Tradzilla's "Institute" must surely be comatose.

    2. Hmm, sounds like you have personal knowledge of what you're saying.

      On an unrelated note, this comment made me very hungry for a slice of Mixed Berry Pie!

  7. What does "prelataster" mean and whence does it come from?

    1. "Prelataster" is our own coinage (we think), modeled after poetaster, as in the play by Ben Jonson. The OED defines the word as "a paltry or inferior poet; a writer of poor or trashy verse." Other common words ending in -aster are philosophaster, "a petty philosopher," and Ambrosiaster, "would-be Ambrose," the name given to the anonymous author of a commentary on Paul's epistles, erroneously thought to have been written by St. Ambrose.

      The Latin suffix -aster expresses incomplete resemblance or smallness. It appears frequently in the Romance languages, e.g., Spanish, padrastro, "step-father" and Italian giallastro, "yellowish." The French form of the suffix is -âtre (e.g., douceâtre, "sweetish, sickly.")

      We needed a word to describe adequately the decidedly inferior and insignificant status of these sede layman who happen to possess illicitly conferred episcopal orders. Outside the Church as they are, they cannot under any circumstances be considered a prelate, i.e., "a dignitary having jurisdiction in the external forum by right of office," just as a filiaster, "stepson," cannot be considered the biological child of a step-parent.

      The definitely pejorative force of the suffix suited our aim perfectly and is far more suggestive than simply enclosing the word bishop in quotation marks.

    2. If such priests do not have ordinary jurisdiction that does mean they are laymen and as persons are also outside the Church.
      To be outside the Church means not being Catholic. All sede and SSPX clerics are not non-Catholic due to lack of ordinary jurisdiction.
      And they are not laymen if they have valid orders which they use to confer sacraments with supplied jurisdiction.

    3. No. They have no mission from the Church, and therefore their status is the same as that of a layman, valid holy orders notwithstanding. Since they have separated from the institutional Church and operate illicitly, they cannot be said to belong to her. At best we can say they profess to adhere to a similar set of principles, in the same way someone might espouse the platform of a political party without being dues-paying, official members of that party. Inasmuch as these men were not granted the four privileges of the clerical state (the Canon, the Forum, Immunity, & Competence), they cannot enjoy clerical status.

      The SSPX may enjoy a special position, which enables them to be deemed "clergy" despite the lack of jurisdiction, therefore we do not yet include them among the renegades.

    4. When you say the "institutional Church", are you referring to that institution whose universal law allows sacrilege in the form of giving the sacraments to non-Catholics?

    5. We mean the institution regarded historically and canonically as the Roman Catholic Church.

      Note that we do not condemn these men for removing themselves from the institution owing to the current ecclesial crisis. Many traditionalists have done so in good conscience. However, we do rebuke those leavers who usurp rights and privileges that pertain only to those who remain members of the institution.

      In our view, these men are layman who accidentally possess holy orders and practice their version of the faith outside the Roman Catholic Church.

    6. That's all well and good, but I suspect that your darlings are vague reflections of far more sophisticated rogues in the official church both of today and of yesterday. I'm not sure of the value of your much vaunted jurisdiction. From whom? Rogues and thieves of higher degree, yes, but rogues and thieves all the same.

      Stay home, and starve all the beasts!

    7. I'm not clear on which church you're talking about here. I only know of one Catholic Church, yet you are talking about something called the "institutional Church", which is regarded (by whom??) historically and canonically as the Roman Catholic Church.

      This seems to be your meaning until your very next sentence, in which you say you don't condemn people who leave this institution. How can you not condemn someone who leaves an institution that you seem to think is the Catholic Church?

      Then in the next sentence immediately after that one you say many traditionalists have left the "institutional Church" in "good conscience". The phrase "in good conscience" is used to refer to an action that is objectively wrong but which the person doing it believed to be right. So that sentence says that actually it *is* wrong to leave the "institutional Church" but most people who left don't realize that.

      Can you please figure out whether the organization that Jorge Bergoglio is head of is the Catholic Church or not and then let us know?

      If you come up with rational explanations for all the above, perhaps next we can address 10:05's point that you skillfully avoided, namely, does the Catholic Church have a law that allows sacrilege in the form of giving sacraments to non-Catholics?

  8. And this is why I love this blog. The eloquence of the languages with a masterful interpretation only peaks ones desire to learn from the Reader. Always a delight to learn something new, in more ways than one.

  9. Interesting enough, the Golden Corral was taken off the SGG young adult get together, and the square dance is now a maybe.

    1. Yeah, now it's down to free "two-topping pizzas" and beverages (probably Kool-Aid) before bowling. Can you get any stingier? A measly two toppings! Man, Dannie's going all out, isn't he? How much ya wanna bet that they won't even come from a pizzeria? They'll probably be some cruddy home-made junk that tastes like cardboard or some awful frozen mess from a discount warehouse. What a rip off. It probably won't even be "all you can eat." The obese singles at YAG will have to soothe their anxieties on bowling alley junk food at their own expense.

      We also note the cult masters are perpetuating a common error by styling "noon" as 12:00 PM. That may be OK for the idiots on the TV weather report, but if these bozos were really the cultured "clergy" they promote themselves top be, they would have written 12:00 M (meridies). But since they're virtually Latinless and sub-educated, they have no idea of the correct use of notation for the 12-hour time convention.

      Now some of you will object, saying the YAG skags and sleaze bags wouldn't understand. If that's the case (and we're sure it is), the cult masters could have written "noon." But face it: they just don't know.

    2. Dolan makes the pizza party details clearer under the UPDATE tab:

      We recently set up our bowling reservation for Sunday but after finding that there was limited space left at our first option, we have changed venues to Game of Fairfield, which is a little farther down the road. Due to a great deal they offered us on pizza for the sustenance of the starving hordes – YUM! – we have also scrapped the Golden Corral lunch plans in favor of eating at the bowling alley. Less hassle, no cost to attendees, and an all in one, easy-to-find location.

      Is THIS pic from the Gilmore Lanes what he has in mind for the new venue?

    3. If the picture in the “link” provided is a “”promotional photo” for Gilmore Lanes, and/or typifies the kind of “clientele” that usually frequents that place, we can see why Dannie “changed venues” for the bowling bash. It definitely looks like “bottom-tier blue collar.” (And does each person in the photo have his/her own personal zip code?) And we seriously doubt that Dannie’s reason for changing venues was “limited space at our first option.” (It was more like Dannie exclaiming, “Gag me with a spoon, Checkie! How did we pick THIS dump??!!)

      BTW, we “googled” the new “venue” (Game of Fairfield). It’s no palace either – but at least their “promotional photo” wasn’t one depicting a herd of elephants. But pizza? “And from a bowling alley? Perhaps if they don’t want to eat it, they can use it for one of their “games”: Frisbee!!

    4. When the YAG-loser crowd of loners and hags led by the lard-gut Uneven Steven hits that joint, we expect its social standing will be lowered considerably. Even toothless hill jacks and biker gals will leave in disgust when those famished warthogs hit the entrance.

    5. Ok Watcher & Reader, you see, to enjoy bowling alley pizza one must first pull the monocle away from ones eye as well as remove the inserted pretentious food taste filter they have arbitrarily inserted between their mouth and brain.

      I recommend you and The Reader take a remedial course in common sense and you will then understand that one does not attend a YAG for the pizza.

      I would also add that those willing to travel to a YAG in order to meet a likeminded person with similar faith and morals are clearly a cut above the rest. You see normal people don’t live in their mom’s basement giggling at their own literary skill while they blog into the night. Normal people actually care about finding a quality mate and don’t mind eating good or bad pizza to do it.

    6. Here at PL's editorial offices on upper floors, we often enjoy pizza, so no one wears a food filter. Our criticism was aimed at $GG's bait and switch tactic for lunch. (It's apparent someone must have told the idiot "planners" that there wouldn't be enough time for an all-you-can-eat buffet at the Golden Corral plus bowling before shuttling to the airport.

      No need here for a course in common sense, although you may need one yourself. Anybody who would attend $GG's YAG or any event it sponsors is not a normal person, and the chances of a "quality mate" surfacing in that gathering of cultists is zero. Anyone who supports the cult masters is depraved.

    7. I don’t think you can call it a bait and switch with the Golden Corral, but if that had chosen a more upscale place you would surely accuse them of squandering church funds to pay for it.

      Even if 100% of what you believe about SGG were true your logic does not follow that anybody attending must not be normal or a quality mate. This is simply because if people are attending from many different parishes they may have no knowledge about the split or any of the things you accuse the Clergy of. To them it may simply be “oh look a get together for single traditional Catholics”

    8. You'd have to have lived as a hermit not to have heard of the cult masters. No, these losers are choosing $GG with full knowledge.

    9. Some have not and others just because they stumble across your pile of BS doesn’t mean they will believe it. Just like everybody that learns of Alex Jones doesn’t automatically become a conspiracy theorist because they know while he brings up some true stuff he is mostly full of it.

      You case would seem much stronger if you didn’t nitpick the small inconsequential items.

      Besides it is hard to believe you when all of my firsthand experience with some of the clergy you blast directly contradicts everything you say about them. (i.e. they have asked me for money, told me not to go to other churches and join only their church, etc)

    10. 1, To each his own.

      2. "He who can take no interest in what is small will take false interest in what is great." (Ruskin)

      3. Your experience is clearly limited. You must be new to Tradistan — or don't listen to the sermons.

  10. Bravo Reader! Your explanation about the crisis in the Church is excellent and hit the nail right on the head. Finally something clear and concise in less than 500 words. Amazing!

    You know I can't help but thinking how the Trad Movement is like the book, " Lord of the Flies".

    1. Brilliant insight! Marooned on Tradistan, the "clergy" have degenerated into savagery and broken up into infighting tribes, each hoping to control the conch.

  11. I gue$$ the good old parish picnic didn't bring in enough revenue, so they are off to a new game, 'Bowling for DOLLAR$" from DUMBO$.

  12. Once you know their game, it is like taking candy from a baby. Thanks for the education P.L.