HOLIDAY CARDS (1)

Ed. Note: While our Readers are on their Christmas break, Pistrina thought you might enjoy some of the correspondence we have received. Even at this time of the year, we will not stop reminding everyone of the Terrible Trio's bizarre circus act. Be sure you starve the beast this season. Keep your wallets closed!

Dear Pistrina,

I am new to the site, so I read through all the posts critiquing Anthony Cekada's Work of Human Hands. I also managed to borrow a copy. Let me first say, that you Readers have done a thorough job of exposing that sham piece of pseudo-scholarship. Let me add, that I am in a unique position to add to your condemnation.

My academic speciality is pragmatics (language usage) and, in particular, discourse analysis. Your detailed post mortem of Cekada's book ably demonstrated his ill preparedness and absence of mastery of fundamentals. For my part, I decided to test whether the distribution of such elements as syntax, vocabulary, sentence structure, etc. also suggested that as a writer he falls outside the normative context of scholarly prose.

I compared sample passages from Work of Human Hands to randomly selected passages from 20 recent works by recognized scholars in the humanities. The result was conclusive. Without boring you with all the methodology, the study showed that, statistically speaking, Cekada as a user of written language does not fall within the expected norms for American scholarly discourse. My model indicates that his register is that of, say, an average college junior, or perhaps a sophomore.

As you have said, Work of Human Hands can by no means pose as a work of scholarship. Perhaps if I have the leisure time, I will write up my findings for future publication.

REMINDER

Some books are undeservedly forgotten; none are undeservedly remembered. Auden

The Blunderer and "One Hand" Dan have been trying of late to pump of sales of that doomed, unscholarly volume, Work of Human Hands. "One Hand" has stooped so low as to hype it in a recent sermon on the necessity of Latin. As the gift-giving season goes into full swing, perhaps this is the time to remind everyone of the many failures of that rag -- failures that reflect the failed legacy of the Terrible Trio, whose pride, arrogance, and overreaching will be forgotten soon enough, as are all human vanities. All their works are best consigned to oblivion.

Just as there are seven deadly sins that we should avoid, here are seven reasons for not wasting your money on such an empty and self-serving product of amateur authorship and publishing:

The academic shortcomings of Anthony Cekada’s Work of Human Hands are legion. First, there is virtually no notion of systematic composition, for sentences are not developed into coherent, unified and structured paragraphs. Second, the author’s diction is not academic but characterized by American regional slang and colloquialisms. Third, the self-taught author commits numerous errors of translation, transcription, and citation from Latin. Fourth, the author, in several cases, has failed to attribute the source of translations. Fifth, the text is littered with non-standard English and unconventional usage. Sixth, typographical errors and misspellings abound. Seventh, the book contains factual errors, as even one favorable reviewer pointed out.

We could continue, but we will not tax your patience. Suffice it to say that Work of Human Hands is at best a mere pantomime of scholarship. For a complete post-mortem of this stillborn insult to the world of genuine learning, start with this post on Pistrina Liturgica and continue reading.

M-M-MAKING THE WORLD SAFE FOR HYPOCRISY

By thy shut soul's hypocrisy/...I call upon thee! and compel/Thyself to be thy proper Hell! Byron

The November MHT Newsletter finally slithered in. No mention of the big $30 K proposal. No reference to "taking over" Our Lady of the Sun. Those pipe dreams have vanished, we surmise. However, there was an overload of hypocrisy. In a peevish fit of self-righteousness, the rector declares, with a shameless absence of self-awareness:

...we have striven carefully over the years to observe faithfully the doctrine and practices of the Catholic Church, and to distance ourselves from others in the traditional movement who are sloppy in this regard. Because of the deprivation of authority in the present crisis, the sheep are without shepherds, and the door is open to all sorts of aberration and abuse. There are many traditional priests, for example, who are ordained without proper training...They arrive suddenly in the priesthood and function poorly, either because they are ignorant, or because they have never learned how to curb their vices and lead good spiritual lives. They have never been vetted by serious seminary training. Their ignorance often leads to very serious errors in dogmatic, moral, or pastoral theology.

How, then, does this square with the practice of his completers of the MHT pesthouse? As we have noted, one of his products could not perform a graveside burial service. (The same feckless fool also committed a major doctrinal error in his requiem sermon.) Another one (even worse trained, if that's possible) skipped the consecration at Mass. That absent-minded creature has also invented a number of new mortal sins and recently could not say the requisite number of Ave, Marias at the Leonine Prayers. Another one cannot bless holy water without being wracked by self-doubt and insecurity (and one of his baptisms is a horror story of incompetent practice: perhaps we'll tell it one day).

This is preserving the the Catholic faith?

Please. Gag us with a spoon!

This is sheer hypocrisy, and yet another instance of the failure of the rector and his dynamic-duo buddies from SW Ohio to create a legacy.

Being "home alone" is far better than being in the company of these theological ne'er do wells. They think they merely have to say they are Catholic for you to believe them, when their works make it plain that they are worse than the men they despise.

Reject them all out of hand -- and anyone who associates with them.

THANKSGIVING INTERLUDE

Ed. Note: Owing to the long Thanksgiving holiday weekend in the U.S., Pistrina prints an e-mail commentary on last week's post. Everyone, it seems, recognizes that those theological turkeys are just plain foul.

Dear Reader,

As a rule, I avoid SSPX Masses because of simple logic, not on that wild-eyed "una-cum" theory. In my book, either Razzi is pope or he isn't. Period! And if he is, then priests have to obey him. (I am a little more lenient with those independent chapels that are just affiliated with the SSPX, because those guys are on their own.)

I've always believed this ever since the early 1970's. It's just common sense. That's not been the case with Brooksville and Cincinnati "entrepreneurs." I remember when one of these "great" theologians was "Sede" in 1977, then pro-papa in 1980, then sede etc. I also remember when the other "theologian" blasted the Thuc lineage in 1983 and then became the great defender in 1990 when his buddy and paymaster wanted a miter. These jokers change their minds whenever it suits them.

Everyone should rely on their conscience and not the trio's opinion "du jour"... in all things!!

UNA-CCEPTABLE

'tis the eye of childhood/That fears a painted devil. Shakespeare

Side by side with the Trying Threesome's failure to produce any reasoned, substantive advancement to the theory of the Sede Vacante, their venal una-cum ghost story condemns them as theological adventurers. Even one of the MHT completers recognizes this fiction for what it is: a patent attempt to keep the faithful from taking their dollars to the SSPX. That's why he gave the green light a while back to some Catholic laity to assist at society Masses. Moreover, the terminally challenged CMRI, as marginalized as it is on the far fringes of Catholic thought and praxis, has enough sense to reject this ploy to scare the ignorant into submission.

No matter what these three self-interested characters argue, the plain fact remains that the Church has not pronounced on the matter. Accordingly, their strident assertions remain just private opinion -- and rather low-level private opinion inasmuch as these three can never be considered theologians.

No one need pay one ounce of attention to this wild theory hatched in the fetid imaginations of ecclesiastical entrepreneurs. The motive behind this amateurish démarche is clearly fear that the faithful will abandon them, their bad habits, and their troubled orders for the more attractive and relatively stable SSPX. What was scary was the prospect of exiting dollars.

Rather than make up boogeyman theories out of whole cloth, the Terrible Trio should focus on getting rid of their odious cultic trappings and attempt, even at this late hour, to make a genuine contribution to Traditional Catholicism, say, by way of the liturgy or pious practices. It's obvious they should abandon theology as a science outside their limited grasp and very minor abilities.

MORE FAILINGS TO MEASURE UP

To be still searching what we know not by what we know, still closing up truth to truth as we find it... this is the golden rule in theology. Milton

Our next instance of the Terrible Trio's failed legacy is in the theology of the Sede Vacante. On "One-Hand's" part, we have only his musings. Neither he nor the Blunderer has produced a credible, carefully reasoned argument for the absolute vacancy of the See of Peter. (How could they? It's not in their DNA.) It's all been just their anecdotal remarks, and you have to take them on their word! (Not likely, in view of the Blunderer's botched work in The Work of Human Hands). In the world of thinking Catholics, their position can never be taken seriously until a brighter light appear (not likely when you look at their young priests -- all pretty dim wits, just hoping for a handout).

Altough we admit that the rector has produced one admirably competent explanation in Scholastic form of the materialiter thesis in Soldalitium (see "The Material Papacy") --excepting, of course, his gross misspelling Vacantis Apostolica (read Apostolicæ) Sedis and his gauche references to "stench"-- he has yet to make a real advance in the theology of the Sede Vacante. In spite of his attempts to suggest a refined interpretation, he has really added nothing material to the Cassiciacum thesis.

All this is owing to the rector's dreadful formation. (That's why his Sodalitium article is so impressive. It's like viewing the performance of a ball-room dancing monkey: one always must ask, how did the trainer manage to pull off the stunt because it can't be real!)

In spite of all the nonsense coming out of "One-Hand," the rector (like the Blunderer) can never be considered a theologian in the classic Catholic sense. He's never studied at a pontifical university and possesses no advanced degree. He's never taught in a genuine university nor did he work under a real professor or genuine ecclesiastical superior (the archbishop might have been remotely close, but no cigar). Neither has he held a real professorship -- everything is self-declared. He's never co-authored an important work. Moreover, he's never been a department head in a recognized university nor has he authored a Latin theological manual or article (in fact, it's said that once a Frenchman severely censured a solo attempt).

In short, the Tiresome Trio really cannot claim to possess knowledge superior to that of many laymen (e.g., the learned and able John Lane of the Bellarmine Forum) or even parish priests. The Threesome had the time to acquire a sound knowledge, but they squandered it by their foolish in-fighting and connatural sloth.

BUST

We know what a person thinks not when he tells us what he thinks, but by his actions. Singer

Perhaps the liturgy is the most obvious example of the failed legacy of the Blunderer, "One-Hand," and the rector. Here we are not referring to the Blunderer's embarrassingly awful book, Work of Human Hands, an ugly patchwork of misspellings, mistranslations, factual errors, shoddy scholarship, dreadful prose, and appalling taste. As Pistrina has demonstrated, that self-published rag stands as a monument of incompetence and over-reaching. (If you are new to this blog, start here and read the posts through December 2010, and you'll see what we mean; for a general criticism, read the incisive review "The Autodidact of the Credence Table.")

What we mean is the Threesome's failure to produce and publish well-researched materials that would help traditional Catholics celebrate the Roman liturgy in their chapels. The Three's failed legacy stands in high relief when we look at the work done by the SPPX and motu chapels, now widely available on the web. These zealous, conservative Catholics have spent their time productively in preparing excellent (and beautifully formatted) ceremonial instructions and reprinting useful and preactical liturgical books (see, for example, the Romanitas Press). Such practical and holy efforts are noticeably absent from the oeuvre of the Three Clerical Stoooges. They're content just to brag that they're preserving the liturgy and really do nothing. And when they've left the scene, nothing will remain other than bitter memories of division, invective, and ineptitude.

It's important to note that most of the superb online resources for the liturgy are of comparatively recent origin, whereas, the Terrible Trio has not done much in the liturgical-printing apostolate in their 35+ years of operation. Instead of promoting the liturgy, they preferred to start trouble in areas well beyond their competence, such as the Blunderer's Schiavo mess and the rector's una-cum hobby horse. All they have done is to offer overproduced spectacles for their own cult followers. (N.B. very few of the cultists actually attend these elaborate theatrical events, where "One-hand," like an enormous toadstool, presides and pretends he's pope.)

However, there is no greater proof of their failure in the liturgy than the damning fact that one of their own priests, an ignoramus who completed MHT and worked several years for "One-Hand," forgot on at least one occasion the Consecration at Mass.

In sum, the contribution of these three has been writ on water. They are legends only in their own deluded minds. Look elsewhere for the future of the traditional movement. Reject them and their failed legacy.