FOOD FOR THOUGHT

The only vice that cannot be forgiven is hypocrisy. The repentance of a hypocrite is itself hypocrisy. Hazlitt

Editor's Note:  Before we get started today, we want to take this opportunity to live up to our word. You may remember we promised to retract our formerly good opinion of the B'ville élite's business acumen if "One Hand Dan" were allowed to be one of the "co-consecrators" on February 22. Most of you know by now that His Deficiency played that part on Thursday; consequently, we hereby acknowledge that we gave the élite Bosses of the Bog too much credit. Maybe Wee Dan had to pinch hit if the Jellyfish bailed out at the last minute, excusing itself with, say, some convenient "necessity" on Long Island. (We'll discuss such possibilities next week in our post-mortem of the Sacrilege in the Swamp.) Whatever the cause, putting Dannie in the ceremony (along with the Skipper and Tony Baloney) was as dumb as dumb can be.

The Blast in the Morass imposed without necessity yet another uncanonical episcopus vagans upon a "bishop"-weary Sedelandia. Disgusted traditional Catholics would do well to ponder the following "meditation," with which years ago our favorite Pinheaded Pilgrim concluded a monograph now infamous for his hypocritical about-face (bold-face emphasis ours; quotation marks the author's):

Can we really take all this seriously and suppose that the “bishops” involved in such goings-on are the future of the Church? Impossible. Even to refer to them as “traditional Catholic bishops” lends too much respectability to the whole business, which is, in this writer’s opinion, very disrespectable indeed. 

One theme which dominates the affair from beginning to end is a gross and dangerous lack of prudence regarding the transmission of Apostolic Succession – a matter in which the slightest lack of prudence is inadmissible. St. Paul reminds us: “Lay not hands lightly on any man” – he does not say: “Lay hands quickly on anyone.” 

What is far more serious, however, is that these men claim that they are the “only legitimate authority” of the Catholic Church and that Catholics are “bound” to obey them. Further, they pretend to exclude from the Catholic Church those traditional priests and laymen who refuse to recognize their “authority” – something no traditional organization we know of presumes to do. By making such claims, these “bishops” have set up their own religion, with its own “magisterium,” its own “episcopal hierarchy,” and its own beliefs. It is a new religion, in spite of its trappings – and all its “episcopal consecrations,” self-important proclamations and inflated claims of “canonical authority” cannot make it into the Catholic religion. It is at the very least in the process of creating what will surely become a schismatic sect. 

The story will not end here – it is probable that “instant bishops" will continue to multiply exponentially, as among the “Old Catholics.” Our missionary friend in Mexico offers us his opinion on this rather gloomy prospect: 

We should have within a few years hundreds or thousands of bishops... without true vocations, the one more ignorant than the other, and an unavoidable cause of more division among traditionalists.

It is not impossible that one day these men will decide that their “authority” allows them to elect a “pope” from among their number. Perhaps we will see them trudge along the path already taken by Palmar de Troya, following some man who wears a tiara that looks like a lampshade and who cranks out “encyclicals” by the dozen. 

If such a day comes, we will then see the ultimate consequences of the movement which, for the moment, seems to promise “a prelate in every pot, and two bishops in every garage.” *

My, my! How self-interest and the passage of time can dramatically reverse a supposedly rock-solid conviction. The author may have ingloriously betrayed his stated principles, but his prediction came true: The always-aspirational swamp finally can boast of its very own pair of wandering "bishops."

Will "One-Hand Dan" let $GG fall behind the Swampland Joneses by not "consecrating" for the SW Ohio cult a second "bishop (?)"? Or could it be his "apostolate" is so tiny and his workload so light and airy that he can get by all on his little lonesome?

Or is it because there's no Mr. Moneybags ordering him around?

* If you'd like to read the whole article, click here.