ADDLED DELUSION

Two types of blindness easily happen at the same time, such that those individuals who do not see what exists in reality seem to see what doesn't exist. Tertullian

The SGG cult center's website posted a revealing sermon of Tony Baloney's, oddly and awkwardly titled "A Brief Biography of Myself and Traditionalism in Milwaukee."  What's significant is not the bald and needy narcissism -- that's typical of anything the SW Ohio cult masters flush out, for whatever those cretins preach about always focuses on them.

What's of real interest is Checkie's disjointed narration about how, way back in his seminary days in Wisconsin, he used to attend a "traditional" Mass offered by a priest who had resisted his lawful superiors. (N.B. the cult masters themselves won't brook any conscience-driven resistance -- witness the 2009 SGG School firings.) From the Bonehead's account, we gather that the Mass at which he assisted served as a source of strength and encouragement for him and his fractious chums.

Now, if we just apply a little bit of thought, we have to conclude that the Mass attended by callow, young Checkmeister was surely the Mass of John XXIII, which the Cheeseball characterized in his dreadfully written, error-filled Work of Human Hands as "a radical break with tradition." That's par for the course, isn't it? When, for lack of a proper sermon topic, Phony Tony wants to strut his Trad credentials before the cultlings, it was O.K. for him to have attended the '62 rite. But when he needs to keep those faithful from straying to another Traddie sect embracing that rite, he condemns it.

(Question: How do you say "chameleon" in Tradistani? Answer: "chekkee".)

The hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty take your breath away. And this isn't the only example, as regular followers of this blog will recall.  Hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty are unmistakable signs not only of mental disorderliness but also of a full-blown cult mentality. The cult masters' opinions are always in flux whenever they see an advantage. Therefore, it's easy for them to thumb their noses at consistency but at the same time insist that things have never changed.

You could almost ignore these clerical shape-shifters' malformation, howling errors in scholarship, unmerited arrogance, pack-rat acquisitiveness, and self-absorption if they didn't compound their offenses with naked Pharisaism.  What's humorous is they think no one notices. Oh, sure, the cultie zombies remain bewitched, but, then, decent Catholic women and men know better than to value the superstitions of the morally blind and the psychically perverted.

Every week the same whipsaw shifts are on display in Daniel the Weasel's "Bishop's (?) Corner." Take a look at what he wrote on August 10:

The main sacrilege of our day is surely the N.O. itself, and Masses offered “one with”* the wicked antichrist occupying Rome.

Hypocritically he accuses the Novus Ordo of sacrilege, albeit he and the Unfortunate 14 he's "ordained" may be committing equally monstrous acts of sacrilege daily if his one-handed ordination is invalid. "One Hand" could dispel all doubt in an instant if he were to seek conditional orders and then re-ordain at least 13 of the 14 luckless souls who inauspiciously chose him as their ordaining "bishop." But pride keeps him from getting fixed. (BTW, his failure to remedy the doubt is something altogether alien to Catholic practice.)

"One Hand's" hypocrisy is only outdone by his promotion of the grandly over simplistic, intellectually dishonest "una-cum" fantasy. Even Li'l Dan knows it's an opinion invented fairly recently by the rent-seeking Big Don and his familiar, the Blunderer. He knows -- or ought to know -- the Church has never entertained their thesis, yet he presents it as though it were an article of faith, which he is brash enough to pretend to teach. Horse feathers! His Vagrancy has no such brief. At best, he can recommend established doctrine as a private person (not as a teacher). He has no business saying anything about unsettled issues without a disclaimer. 

Behind the septic hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty lies the wrongful lemma that Dannie's cult somehow represents -- or embodies --the true Church, and therefore he has the authority to convince others of sin. There's nothing immediately self-evident about that sede fiction. Indeed, the opposite is true. The behavior of the cult's clerics and the failure of "One Hand's" apostolate lead us to affirm the falseness of his avouchment.  His cult is just one of many factions asserting without warrant a claim on Catholicity. We don't have a problem with an individual priest's suppressing the una cum phrase in the Canon in his Mass. That's a matter of conscience. Our problem is with the cult fabulists who insist that those who in their good conscience do recite the phrase are sinners. At this time, given our imperfect knowledge, no one knows -- and no one can affirm -- what's the authentic Catholic teaching on the issue!

The truth of it is that Dannie's cult is a garish simulacrum, a low-brow parody, of the Church. Behind the empty pageantry and meretricious performance art of the "pontifical" big shows, where towering minions fuss over a wee, proletarian Dannie as he comically plays the aristocrat, there lies the harsh reality of untrained (and possibly invalid) clergy, savage self-interest, and the nagging fear of eventual exposure. Nothing is substantial. It's all make-believe: make-believe bishop and priests, make believe scholars and theologians, make-believe piety, make-believe 1950's Catholicism. All that's real is the fast friendship with the mammon of iniquity.

If you're not a cult slave, you know the Church doesn't reside in Tradistan. What poobah Dan and panjandrum Don have on offer -- non-stop fundraising, protean teachings, and theological legends -- bears only a superficial but misleading resemblance to the authentic Roman Catholic Church. On closer inspection, the sighted recognize it's a mirage.

COME OUT OF THE DARKNESS INTO THE REAL WORLD. GET OUTTA DANNIE AND DONNIE'S FANTASY LAND TODAY.

* "One with" is Dannie's translation of una cum. He's trying to be poetic with this supposedly hyper literal rendering. The trouble is, he's wrong. The una of una cum is really unā, an adverb from the feminine ablative singular form. The literal meaning, then, of unā  is in one and the same action or process, hence together, in company, at the same time. Like Cheeseball Checkie, he has no understanding of the way the Latin language operates. He's forever thinking like a very backward, linguistically challenged first-year student. As usual, he's trying to show off, and he falls flat on his face. One more reason not to click on the DONATE button if ever you're cyber-slumming at sgg.org/cult.

SIMPLE ARITHMETIC?

... it is wise to concede that all things are one. Heraclitus (Fragment 50)

Deacon Dan must be getting fidgety about his doubtful orders: lots of traditional Catholics in the U.S., France, South America, and Mexico are talking about His One-Handedness and the real threat of invalid sacraments.

We wonder if that's why Daniel the Dirtbag is sending two of his doubtfully ordained "priests" abroad "for a Summer vacation visit to La France Sacré (sic!)," as he boasted in his August 3 "Bishop's (?) Corner." (Grammar-challenged Dannie, the relentless vulgarian, apparently never learned that la France is feminine, so the adjective must also be feminine -- Sacrée. He really shouldn't try to put on airs with such a lousy formation and unrefined personal background: he looks so very silly.)

Perhaps this tour is an attempt to allay some of the concerns over there about his one-handed ordination. The question over here is: Are the two goofball "priests" paying their way out of their own savings, or is the cult center underwriting all or part of the trip? Considering their "formation," it's hard to see how this odd couple could calm Gallic anxieties about dubious sacraments. We doubt the highly cultured, education-loving French will pay heed to the two meatballs if they go as ambassadors for Dannie's orders.

On this side of the Atlantic, fresh tales from the East Coast inform us that CLODs ("close loyalists of Dannie") are feverishly telling everybody who'll listen that only a substantial change in the matter of a sacrament renders it invalid. According to Li'l Dan's surrogates, when Abp. Lefebvre imposed one hand on Wee Dan's pin head in 1976, it was not a substantial change to Pius XII's rite (which, we point out again, without question specifies the imposition of hands). Apparently they've wisely abandoned Tony the Blunderer's other arguments and are circling the wagons on this one point. Although last year we defeated or rebutted all the arguments Tony Baloney marshaled to support this contention, today we'll put to bed the specious "defense" in a way even a child can understand.

Let's first pose the central question of the debate:

A substantial change in the matter of a sacrament occurs when the matter employed, according to common usage and the estimation of prudent men (secundum communem usum et prudentium aestimationem), is not of the same appearance and name as that determined by Christ and the Church.* Accordingly, in light of Pius XII's very specific, infallible teaching that determined the imposition of hands as the valid matter of the sacrament of priestly orders, Catholics must ask whether, according to common usage, one hand means the same thing as -- and looks like --  two hands.

Now, we'll answer the question by way of a case:

Inflamed by prurient sermons on women's dress and their sandals, Spurius, a leering, sede juvenile delinquent with a menacing overbite and terminal post-nasal drip, sits in a sticky back pew busily eyeballing hemlines and ankles.  He spies an "immodestly dressed" and summer-shod young fashionista, Virginia, as she gingerly shuffles out of the howling cult center in her spiffy, new Okabashis after being denied communion. Amid a spray of mucous-coated spittle, he snorts to himself, "Dat widdle fwoozie's gotta wearn a wesson in humiwity and iwwumination." He then clumsily springs to his two clubfeet to pursue her, as the crumpled, soiled newspapers on his lap fall noisily to the floor. When the on-trend maiden pauses to dab away a shimmering tear before exiting the squalid industrial park where the fly-blown cult center stands, the yellow-toothed, teen-aged cultie expertly breaks into the trunk of the coördinator's rusted 1992 Pontiac Firebird -- shredding, in the process, a faded I [HEART] TRADISTAN decal that masked the few, stray streaks of original primer. He steals the tire iron and, awkwardly twirling the deadly tool like a baton, menacingly resumes stalking the unsuspecting maiden. Two alert police officers in a passing cruiser observe the foaming, stumbling Trad hoodlum. Alarmed, they determine to shadow him. When the pot-holed access road dead ends, the pert young miss, absorbed in the stinging memory of her ill treatment at the hands of the mentally unbalanced priest and the shrieking harpies of the altar guild, turns around. To her astonishment, the excitedly panting sede bad-seed collides with her. Brandishing with wicked intent the greasy tire iron, the unsightly Traddie youth screeches at the startled lass, "Gimme yer fwip-fwops!" At that moment, the police leap from the patrol car, swiftly draw their side arms, and shout, "Put your hands in the air!" Curling his impetigo-ravaged lips into a crusty Elvis-Presley sneer, the junior sede thug and home-school-valedictorian raises just his one free hand. 

Well, we've all watched enough TV to guess what happens next, haven't we? Any resultant investigation by the cops' Internal Affairs Bureau will rule the ensuing police response justified: Every prudent man knows that hands doesn't mean hand.

The same goes for Sacramentum Ordinis: when Pope Pius XII decreed the imposition of hands as the matter of priestly ordination, he surely did not mean one hand would do. The Sovereign Roman Pontiff knew that, according to common usage, 1 does not equal 2.

Only a restored Church can give us a definitive answer to the puzzle of the archbishop's negligence. (Was it a Freudian slip?) In the meantime, all Catholics must follow the safer course and consider, as did the nine priests in 1990, "One-Hand Dan's" orders to be doubtful. (Naturally, the same goes for the Unfortunate 14 he's "ordained.")

Put an end to the ongoing threat of sacrilege. Tell all these losers to seek conditional orders immediately.

* Tanquerey, Synopsis Theologiae Dogmaticae (11th ed.) , III, § 285

THE UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE

Say, is there Beauty yet to find?/ And Certainty? and Quiet kind? Brooke

Nothing characterizes the ongoing ecclesial crisis more accurately than the absence of certitude about once certain assumptions of Catholic life. The result has been a riot of competing guesses -- a few plausible, most untenable --about the Church's constitution. Exacerbating the confusion has been the appearance of self-interested, striving, clerical adventurers hell-bent on grabbing for themselves the kind of comfortable life that their social class, poor work ethic, and inferior education would have denied them were it not for the pitiable state of Christ's Church. (To be frank, the majority of these detestable loafers would've had a hard time becoming lay brothers in the good ol' days.)

For most of us, this uncertainty is maddening. We join a chapel based on emotion or prejudice or convenience. We persevere in our choice, for we've resigned ourselves to never knowing with certainty whether our decision was right or wrong. That's probably how most Traddies ended up in one or another of the several sede sects. It also explains why most don't leave even after such moral catastrophes like the 2009 SGG School Scandal. It's plainly a matter of negative loyalty: No matter how bad things are, the situation is probably worse elsewhere, so stick with the devil you know.

We'll never have meaningful answers until the Restoration. That event may not happen in our lifetimes. Nevertheless, our ignorance needn't condemn us to living with the nasty results of an honest mistake. In other words, there must be a way for us to sort out which Trad sect or chapel is the least injurious to our soul, our family, our bank account, and our will. Then we can escape Cultilandia.

Well, we think we've found the way, and that way is uncertainty itself. Here's what we mean:

If you're thinking of joining a chapel or want to decide whether to stay in the one you're in, talk to the priest about such topics as the defection of the pope, the Pius X/Pius XII/1962 liturgies, the validity of N.O. holy orders, una-cum Masses, modesty and strapless women's shoes, attendance at chapels with differing views, the Thục lineage, Sedevacantism and/or Sedeprivationism,  etc. (If, like many of Tradistan's clergy, yours is surly, backward, uncommunicative, or arrogantly standoffish, you'll have to listen to his public remarks on these matters.)

If he somehow acknowledges that these are opinions, not Church dogma, and that you are by no means required to agree 100% with him in order to assist at Mass and receive the sacraments, then you may have found the right place. Don't worry if he tries to persuade you. That's to be expected, as long as his attempts aren't high-pressured or harassing. Just leave at once if later he denies you communion or absolution, threatens you with removal, accuses you of mortal sin if you can't go along with his whole program, or claims that you are "confusing" the other faithful.

Believe it or not, there are priests out there well-formed enough to know the difference between sacred dogmas pronounced by the magisterium and mere speculations concocted by malformed ecclesiastical entrepreneurs. An intellectually honest, trustworthy, intelligent priest will acknowledge that the opinions he holds on these topics are not revealed truth. His uncertainty, then, is a sure sign that you haven't landed in a cult where a money-mad, disturbed control-freak aims to do violence to your conscience and empty your pocketbook.

On the other hand, run from any con artists who glibly offer pat answers to the profound mysteries of the Vatican II crisis. You now can recognize them. (But, then, you knew their identities without our help, didn't you?)

DREAM ON

Unpinned even by rudimentary notions of time and space, dreams float or flash by, leaving in their wake trails of unease, hopes, fears and anxieties. Brook

As Yahoo almost daily reports another of Bergoglio's madcap efforts to remake the Vatican Establishment into something the Novus Ordo itself doesn't recognize, the sede cult kingpins renew their unrealistic hopes of an emergent, cult-plagued empire. Most importantly, these uneasy pipe dreamers envision their corporate, out-of-state bank accounts swelling with the grateful contributions of the disenchanted, conservative Novus Ordites who, they vainly fancy, will flock to their discredited cult centers. According to these lucre-addicts' hallucinations, the fresh meat will revive both their emptying chapels as well as their dashed hopes of influence. The crowds of refugees, these hucksters calculate, will more than recompense them for their ongoing losses. Once more (they dream) the 7:00 a.m. Sunday Mass will be standing room only, and the weekly collection will skyrocket past pre-2009 highs. No longer will they have to pad the statistics.

While we certainly agree that conservative Catholics are growing dismayed at Bergie's ungodly pronouncements, we have seven reasons why we don't believe that these latter-day pilgrims will set out for Tradistan's wasteland once they finally see the light.

First, the leavers will be mainly thinking, educated Catholics, not the addled "I'll-stick-with-the-Holy-Father-come-hell-or-high-water" types. (How similar to the trad troglodytes who cling to Dannie and Donnie despite the evidence!) That means these prospects will do the research before they leap to any group promising the true Catholic faith. It won't take them very long to find all the negative stories on the web about the cult's infamous clerics and their reprehensible antics over the years, especially the 2009 SGG School Scandal and Cheeseball Tony Baloney's blood-curdling, vengeful "opinion" about forsaken, tortured Terri Schiavo, who surely met a martyr's death.*

Second, they're used to accountability. As corrupt as the Novus Ordo is, there do exist institutional mechanisms and processes for the redress of lay grievances against clerical injustice and over-reach. Moreover, the abuse scandals of recent years have radicalized the N.O. laity, so, from the start, they'll be wary of arrogant sede clergy who are obviously out of their depth. These good people are used to speaking truth to power, so they won't remain silent in the face of bad behavior and B.S. from ineffectual ne'er-do-wells elbowing their way to an easy life. When they see how "One Hand" and Big Don run everything like a whip-crackin'  ante-bellum Mississippi plantation, they'll stay away or they'll leave at once, if they'd been so stupid as to ignore all the ominous warnings on the 'Net.

Third, those souls who do wander in out of curiosity, or through bad luck, will soon detect all the characteristics of a religious cult. The outlandish, ego-centric, self-referential sermons and communications. The Una-cum scam. The sede spielers' preoccupation with making money in the form of "alms" and bailouts. The requirement to socialize only with members of the cult, to sever family ties, and to alter personal goals. The expectation and constant exhortation to devote large amounts of time to the cult's activities, including policing the cult leader's garden and supplying food for cult's possibly invalid hirelings. The vigorous discouragement of questions about finances and the cult leaders' practices. The emphasis on the cult leader's personality and the demand for unquestioning commitment to his ever-shifting aims. The cult masters' unceasing attempts to induce feelings of shame and guilt in order to control the membership. The polarizing "us-versus-them" mentality.  The manic drive to attract new members. The luxury spa vacations and fancy trips abroad, cynically disguised as "pilgrimages" and "apostolates."

Fourth, any N.O. exiles are sure to steer clear once they read a few issues of Li'l Dan's twee "Bishop's (?) Corner" with his morbidly obsessive, ghoulish, weekly accounts of the clergy's marauding pet hell-cats' bloody offerings of  shredded baby-bunny carcasses. They'll see it for what it is: sick! sick! SICK!

Fifth, many, if not most, of the newcomers will come from upper-middle-class parishes where their fellow Catholics shared the same social values, upwardly mobile aspirations, and good genes as they. The minute they spy the mousie, greasy-haired, rheumy-eyed Trad womenfolk wrapped like rickets-riddled mummies in floor-length skirts sewn from faded curtains shoplifted from the local Goodwill thrift store, they'll turn in mortal fear and run. In fact, they'll exit so quickly they won't notice either the females' slobbering mates hunched over beside them in a formless, quivering heap or their undernourished, sallow-faced, flinching spawn. Furthermore, since many of these new arrivals will possess advanced degrees themselves, they'll recoil at the sede clergy's notoriously impoverished formation. (Remember that many N.O. priests and bishops possess real academic credentials, having earned their bachelor's, master's, and/or doctoral degree from recognized colleges and universities, not the Flushing Rat's intellectual leprosarium or some vague "independent study.")

Sixth, the cult money-grubbers don't have the sense to realize that potential N.O. recruits aren't the least bit interested in the question of the invalidity of Novus-Ordite holy orders. They'll have left the conciliar Church because of Bergoglio's hostility to the basic tenets of the faith, not because they believe their former priests and bishops were invalidly ordained. Accordingly, when the cult masters start preaching their unprovable, rent-seeking hypothesis -- and that's all it is, until the Restoration settles all such questions -- these folks will step back in disgust. Some will leave even faster once they learn the story of Dannie's orders: No one wants to risk leaving the N.O. only to find his family assisting at sacrilegious Masses.

Seventh, these searchers are products of contemporary, casual, mid-American culture, so when they come face to face with the cult's quickfire, paranoiac dress codes coupled with the fearful cult masters' disturbing fetish with women's clothing and footwear, they'll rebel, especially when women and young girls are blamed as the cause for randy Trad menfolk's lubricious fantasies.  Moreover, in an age when first professionals dine at upscale restaurants in smart polos and sporty cavalry twills, they'll laugh at the cult's lunatic insistence on dress shirts, ties, and jackets. And you really can't blame them.  Last Sunday, Dannie railed against the casual dress and "slovenly attire" of Traddie visitors to his cult center, betraying the fact that other (mentally stable) Trads unattached to his cult reject all such sinister, mind-control efforts. The Novus Ordo may have deprived these folks of the ancient faith but not of common sense. To see the other side's point of view, we've got a little test for you.  Who better honors our Lord in "His house" and on "His day" (as Wee Dan might say):  (1)  an immaculately barbered gentleman outfitted in a professionally starched, open-necked tattersall shirt with spotless, crisply pressed khakis and well-cared-for, country bluchers; or (2) an unkempt, ill-shod, cultling zombie lout stuffed into a wrinkled, dingy-white shirt with a food-stained tie under a moth-eaten sweater-vest that fails to cover an unsightly, flaccid gut pillowing over stained work pants so tight-in-the-seat as to threaten an ill-timed (and, indeed, unwelcome) mooning?

It's time the anxious cult's hawkers wake up and end their impossible dream. The beneficiaries of any mass exodus from the N.O. will be the SSPX, the FSSP, and those traditional priests with sense enough to reject the moribund sede business model. The only Novus-Ordite seekers to join the cult chapels will be spasm-shattered misfits, who, in short order, will wreak so much mischief that the cult barkers'll wish they'd folded their circus tents to head for a subdued retirement in the desert Southwest.

* When the neophytes read what an authentically trained and humane  priest,  Fr. Juan Carlos Iscara of the SSPX, has to say on the matter in general, they'll avoid the cult and idiot Checkie like the plague. See for yourself here.

BONUS ROUND OF TRAVELERS' TRIBUNAL

Last week's post was to have been the last in this summer's Travelers' Tribunal series. However, as a number of e-mail correspondents protested, the case was a real "downer." For the trip back home, our followers demanded something on the lighter side. We had to agree. All four cases were pretty disgusting, when you think about it, with the fourth's being so positively repugnant that many travelers had to stop early to find a motel and get a hot shower.

O.K., then, lighten up and put on a happy face :-) This week's bonus case comes from a sermon one of Tradistan's smirking simpletons delivered to the stunned faithful one Sunday. (For safety's sake, while you're reading, the driver might want to pull off to the side of the road in case he or she bursts into convulsive laughter at such stupidity.)

A smarmy priest preaches how he and a pretentious clerical pal were traveling in an expensive European country. He smilingly told the wary faithful that the two of them decided to vacation there because they had heard that priests in Catholic countries dined and lodged free of charge (!)  The churlish twosome checked into a posh hotel, lived large, and ate high on the hog throughout their stay. As the lamebrain priest tells it, the boorish duo was highly impressed with the attentive service, as staff catered to their slightest whim. (These two clowns must have considered themselves as princelings of the Church. Can't you almost hear the self-congratulations these cronies exchanged?) Then, as the tinhorns went to check out of the hotel, they were stunned when management graciously presented the grasping pair of stooges with a HUGE BILL.

Once you recover from your laughing fit, consider first that their chapel probably ended up paying for all this excess luxury motivated by greed and ignorance. Next consider the social origin and mental capacity of clergy who would be so fatuously naïve as to believe that a swank hôtelier would suffer two painfully backward American clerics to lodge in the lap of luxury and gorge themselves on fine continental dining for free. Ask yourselves whether such thinking is mainly moronic or largely larcenous. Finally, ask -- and answer -- why on earth would anyone tell such a story on himself and his sidekick, especially to a congregation that contained some cosmopolitan, well-traveled professionals! Although the anecdote impressed a few of the usual head-twitching, low-brow Tradistan rabble (who were, by the way, foaming with indignation that a foreign innkeeper would dare to charge their cult leaders for fancy grub and deluxe digs), the educated in the audience were alternately amused and aghast at the simple-minded effrontery of this sleazy Mutt-and-Jeff act. (This story has, in years since, proved to be great entertainment at the cocktail parties and dinner outings of the educated Catholic laity. Our question is: Should these vacuous bosom-buddies catch a break for serving as the butt of dozens of cutting jokes at their expense, or do they deserve the maximum punishment for their rapacious intentions?)

WHY GIVE YOUR MONEY TO SUCH SCUMBAGS AND IDIOTS? WHEN YOU GET BACK HOME, FIND AN ALTERNATIVE: IT'LL IMPROVE YOUR SELF-ESTEEM!

TRAVELERS' TRIBUNAL: GAME FOUR (NC-17 RATING)

Today's game, the last in the series, is for adults only, perhaps a couple of touring empty-nesters out with an opinionated, Novus-Ordo sister-in-law along for the ride, but certainly NO RUG-RATS ALLOWED! Our case consists largely of direct quotations from bylined newspaper articles printed in the "Detroit News (DN)" and "The Macomb Daily (MD)." (Click here to review the rules of play.)

So, ladies and gentlemen, start your engines, whip out your barf bags -- you'll need 'em today -- and begin reading case # 4:

A woman sues a sede priest "claiming he forced her to have sexual relations while counseling her and that she became pregnant. DN" In her claim, she says the priest "used deception, religious duress and intimidation to force her to engage in sex about a month after she sought his help...According to the suit, [the woman] said the assaults started a month after she began seeing [the priest] for religious and psychological counseling...Her problems stemmed from being sexually abused as a child, family problems and suicidal tendencies. MD" She also claims the priest "forced her to resume the affair...after she became pregnant and had an abortion. DN" The woman "said she became emotionally depressed after she became pregnant and [the priest] 'was relieved when the fetus was aborted...'DN" One newspaper account reports, "The suit was filed two years after [the priest] was released from prison to a halfway house after serving 17 months for involuntary manslaughter. MD"  (The "manslaughter charge [stemmed] from the traffic death of a 6-year-old girl...DN" The sede priest "was speeding ... when he lost control of his car, veered up an embankment and struck and killed [the] 6-year-old...who was with her mother waiting outside their disabled car for a tow truck. MD" Another newspaper article reveals that the priest "has received 10 speeding tickets [during the previous five years], including one violation for driving 105 mph in a 55-mph zone...according to the Secretary of State's Office records. His driver's license is currently under three suspensions for failing to pay speeding fines...and he has 10 points on his driving record, records show. MD" ) The suit is "settled out of court" about three years after the relationship began "for $90,000 DN," which the priest's sponsoring  sede "parish" pays. About a year and a half  after the settlement, a newspaper account notes that the woman "is battling to collect a $100,000 settlement an ex-clergyman agreed to pay her after she accused him in a lawsuit of getting her pregnant... However, [the priest], who court records indicate denied forcing the woman into a sexual relationship, has not paid the $100,000 agreed to in a mediation settlement DN," which took place after the "parish" settled. The woman's attorney "said [the priest] never intended to pay, choosing instead to declare bankruptcy and leave the state. DN"

Consider that after the lawsuit, this sacrilegious deadbeat dropped out of sight and the woman's lawyer had to hire private investigators to try in vain to find him.  Consider that he later reappeared in New England at an independent chapel. After he was outed, a board member explained, according to the "Roslindale-West Roxbury Transcript on Townonline.com," that "during the hiring, he and the board consulted with priests from around the country who recommended [the scumbag]." Consider also that this man is still acting as a priest-in-good-standing in Sedelandia. He flies way under the radar, but has been reported to have attended a recent priests' retreat out West, and a number of years ago was notably photographed with a group of well known sede clergy at a priestly jubilee in sunny California. You may also determine whether all his future travel money should be sent to the woman. Remember: unlike the unjust real world, there's no statute of limitations or bankruptcy protection in the Travelers' Tribunal.

SURELY THE PRIESTLY ENABLERS DESERVE PUNISHMENT, TOO! HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO BET THAT ONE OF THESE SEDE CREEPS ADVISED THIS GOB-OF-SPIT TO FILE FOR BANKRUPTCY TO ESCAPE HIS FINANCIAL OBLIGATION?

TRAVELERS' TRIBUNAL: GAME THREE

Last week's game really rocked, didn't it? One e-mail correspondent asked if amputation was an option, but that very effective remedy belongs to another dispensation, we fear. This week's game is a little different from the first and second. If you brought grandma along on the road trip, let her do the reading ... but be warned: She may want to stop immediately to call her lawyer and change her will. (Click here to review the rules of play.)

Gas up, put the pedal to the metal, and away we go with case #3, which we assembled from numerous documents, a newspaper account, and oral reports from fans:

A deceased member of a chapel under the malign care of a dishonorable sede gang had conditionally bequeathed to the chapel an estate valued at the time between $60,000 - $85,000 to erect a shrine to the Infant Jesus of Prague and, if some money remained, to establish another shrine to the Blessed Virgin Mary. If the remaining funds were insufficient to erect the second shrine, the terms of the will permitted the pastor or the laymen in charge to use the residue of the corpus as they saw fit.  Breaking with their usual practice of letting the chapel coordinator handle all bills and accounts, the insolent priests transfer the money to their account at an out-of-state bank. The laity wait six months for a sign that the shrine(s) will be built, and then lose faith in these conniving priests. The lay coordinator, a founding member of the chapel and a successful business owner, raises questions about the handling of the money. For his meritorious fidelity to the pious last wishes of the testatrix, one of the scumbag priests bans the gentleman from chapel property and forbids his attendance at chapel affairs. (The weirdo priest accuses him of fomenting "dissension, intrigue, murmuring and the like.") When the now-former coordinator appears at an evening meeting of the chapel, the police are called to escort him from the premises. A majority of the chapel invites the slime-bucket priests to leave. There is the inevitable lawsuit. The lay people prevail and get the money and their property back. Later they turn the chapel over to the diocese as an indult-Mass center. Today an impressive, newly built parish-church operated by the FSSP occupies the original site. The chapel is thriving, and boasts a new Berghaus pipe organ.

First, consider that these savage priests must have been raised by wolves. Second, consider their impiety. Also, take into account that had these greedy clerics complied with the will in the first place, the chapel might still be independent of the Novus Ordo. You may not forego punishment on the grounds that they were deprived of the bequest and the property by the adverse decision in the lawsuit and thus have suffered enough. You must exact punishment for their (1) contempt for common decency and the reverent wishes of a devout Catholic and (2) the loss of souls.*

* One day, the full story of this shameful incident needs to be told in full. The clerical shenanigans will make any decent person's blood boil. The laity were successful here because this chapel was lucky enough to have a large number of professional people (including former armed-services officers) who knew the difference between right and wrong, and who weren't intimidated by bottom-feeding priests. Also, one of the decedent's brothers got involved and put his foot down when he sensed these scheming priests were up to no good.  But Travelers' Tribunals don't need to know this in order to vote guilty and hand down justly harsh punishment.

HAVE NO MERCY ON THESE MERCENARIES:

GIVE 'EM THE MAX.