YE BROOD OF VIPERS

Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for your tradition?  The Gospel According to St. Matthew

Ed. Note: Here's an email we received from one of the reading-challenged cultlings in response to our posts of January 19 and 26:

You are the HYPOCRITES. You slam Father McKenna for studying first with one priest and then with Father Cekada and not at Most Holy Trinity Seminary but last year you pushed a 2 year crash program for new priests in your stupid lay governance program. Your hate blog has done nothing but trash Most Holy Trinity Seminary, so how dare you say that future priests should study there!! You Readers talk out of both sides of your mouths.

Such unprovoked venom! Tsk, tsk. In the name of charity, let's set the record and this poor soul straight:

We are not opposed to the private tutorial method as an emergency means of training priests throughout the on-going ecclesial crisis. We stated so in the footnote of the January 26 post ("Unprincipled Interest"). Actually, the Readers affirm the tutorial method can be superior to the empty formation on offer at the jokingly styled seminaries (LOL) of Trad World U.S.A., provided the tutors have been suitably educated in real, accredited academic institutions. Moreover, we have never suggested that any young man study for the priesthood at Most Holy Trinity Seminary. In fact, our unwavering policy has been to discourage decent aspirants to the priesthood from entering the pesthouse.

Our objective, which we thought had been made clear, was to publish the cult-masters' flagrant hypocrisy. You see, the McNewbie was "trained" outside a formal seminary, in part by Tony Baloney himself, the author of the article "Untrained and Un-Tridentine: Holy Orders and the Canonically Unfit."  Wee Dannie, the McNewbie's ordaining bishop (?), celebrated that drivel as a "landmark study" in his reprehensible nasty-gram to a lay association abroad ("The Poison Pen"). You'll recall we reported Dannie's fuming that a young priest "never completed a seminary program." We'll add here that he spitefully observed, "Had he [the young priest] settled down to seminary life, he would be a valid priest today, rather than the dubious character he has become."

The Blunderer's article, at its core a rent-seeking screed for MHT and a shamelessly self-promotional (and undeserved) valentine to himself, makes a very big deal over what he calls the "Tridentine system," which he squarely associates with seminary attendance. Witness this passage:

The seminary system established by the Council of Trent and prescribed by canon law provides candidates for ordination with a proper spiritual formation (through the seminary rule, daily schedule, regular spiritual direction, observation and correction, and faculty evaluation) and the required ecclesiastical education (knowledge and understanding of Latin, two years philosophy, four years theology). The Tridentine system insures that ordinands are “properly judged” (rite probati) over a long period of time on both their conduct and their knowledge, and that they are therefore indeed canonically fit for ordination.

And this one:

The decrees of the Council of Trent prescribed that “those who are to be ordained must live in a seminary, and there be formed in ecclesiastical discipline, and receive Holy Orders after having been properly judged.”

And again:

Canon 972.1 states the general rule: “All candidates for sacred orders … are obliged to live a (sic) seminary at least throughout the entire course of their theological studies.”

And again and again:

 The seminary program insures that ordinands are “properly judged” (rite probati) on basis (sic) of their conduct and their knowledge, and therefore canonically fit for ordination.

Pius XI warns: “Anyone who undertakes the sacred ministry without training or competence should tremble for his own fate, for the Lord will not suffer his ignorance to go unpunished… If ever there was an obligation on priests to be men of learning, it is even more pressing at the present time.” (Blunderer's emphasis. He actually cites the first part of this quotation twice in the article.)

and AGAIN:

...the law prescribes that your (sic) must live in the seminary: “The obligation affecting the course of theology requires not merely study in a seminary, but actual residence, and the obligation is a grave one.” (Blunderer's emphasis.)

 In his summary, the Cheeseball hoped that "this discussion will help the lay reader better understand and appreciate the traditional seminary formation received by Catholic priests."

O.K., O.K., O.K., already! We got the message: If you want to be a Tridentine priest, then you've got to do your training in a seminary.

 But if that's still true today, then why didn't the Bonehead defend the "Tridentine system" when Li'l Dan maneuvered to bring in the McNewbie to study privately at the Ohio cult center after the man had been studying privately with another priest out West? Why didn't the Cheeseball bring Dannie up to speed about the necessity of a "proper academic formation" in a seminary where "seminary superiors will observe, form and judge the seminarian’s character and behavior — something very difficult to do if he does not live in community with them"? Why, we ask, didn't the Blunderer insist upon the McNewbie's attending Most Holy Trinity Seminary, at least for two years, maybe even for three or four, if the obligation is really so grave? Why would the Blunderer allow fast-tracking that, based on the content of his article, would seem to be injurious to  "[t]he dignity of Christ’s priesthood and the general good of the Church"?

If Checkie had read his article aloud and slowly to Dannie, he surely could have warned Deacon Dan "that an unschooled, unformed priest is a time-bomb waiting to go off. When the explosion comes, scandal follows and souls are driven away from the traditional Mass." Maybe "One Hand" just might have gotten the message, especially where the Blunderer quotes canon law: “'The theological course of studies must be taken, not privately, but in schools instituted for this purpose according to the prescribed course of studies laid down in canon 1365.'” * Maybe "One-Hand Dan" would have seen the error of his ways if only the Checkmeister had warned him that "the Church’s norms are exacting, and those who do not meet them are unfit to receive, exercise or confer the sacrament of Holy Orders. The ministrations of such clergy, therefore, should be avoided by traditional Catholics everywhere." Checkie failed his bishop (?) for sure.

By now, we hope our overly exercised correspondent has learned what Pistrina advocates and who the real hypocrites are.  Certainly at this juncture he knows who "speaks with forked tongue" in this matter. Over the twisted arc of their failed apostolate, the self-righteous cult masters  have demanded rigid adherence to the law, yet here we see they refuse to observe the strict obligations they endeavor to impose on all others. Undoubtedly they think they don't need to concern themselves with external formalities: the intolerable rigor of the law is intended for suckers, certainly not for the "special" Poobahs and Panjandrums of Tradistan along with their undereducated sycophants, who can't be faithful to the tradition they publicly embrace.

No, the high-and-mighty cult masters  mustn't be bothered about such a trifle as faithfully adhering to one's announced principles.  That's why "One Hand" didn't think twice about conveniently ignoring the Blunderer's "landmark study," and that's why the Blunderer didn't feel bound to defend his own opinions either, or to throw a bone to the rector, whom the McNewbie's ordination has effectively turned into the Rodney Dangerfield of Trad World. 

No matter how much whitewash these whited sepulchers slather on, they always manage to leave the pentimento of Pharisaism, don't they? 

* * * * * * * * * 

Admittedly, reading anything the Blunderer writes makes an educated Catholic cringe. Luckily, his editorial sloppiness and aggressive ignorance of Latin provide a comic relief from all the dire hypocrisy and cant. The article "Untrained and Un-Tridentine," like his irreparably shoddy, error-crammed Work of Human Hands, gives us a chance to laugh ourselves silly at this ridiculous driveler playing the scholar. (Psst! Anthony boy! Nobody's fooled.) For our fans' enjoyment, in addition to the blunders quietly noted in three passages above, here is another pair of howlers (color emphases ours):

1. The Cheeseball quotes Pius XI but cannot get the correct English form of the verb for a line of Scripture:

Anyone who undertakes the sacred ministry without training or competence should tremble for his own fate, for the Lord will not suffer his ignorance to go unpunished; it is the Lord who has uttered the dire warning: "Because thou has rejected knowledge, I will reject thee, that thou shalt not do the office of priesthood to me".

Every schoolboy knows it should be "hast."

2. Like everything else we've exposed since 2010, the Bonehead's article spotlights his irremediable problems with the Latin language. In footnote 16, Tony Baloney prints Nemo sive saecularis sive religiosus ad primam tonsuram promoveatur ante inceptum cursum theologicam.  Anyone with an ounce of Latin would have known the adjective must be theologicum; this gross boo-boo proves that the Blunderer has no feel for Latin concord, after so many years. A Latinless but conscientious transcriber would have at least cross-checked the text with a printed copy of the Code of Canon Law. Apparently the Blunderer "has 'had' some Latin, or has 'passed' a Latin course or two" but doesn't understand "the language sufficiently."

 * N.B. The word "privately" (in the Latin of the CJC, privatim) not only means "at home" but also "individually, separately, as a private person and not as a member of a public body." Hence, a single individual who studies theology under a tutor (or a succession of tutors) takes his course of studies privately.

Private study a definite no-no, as long as you believe the 1917 Code of Canon Law is in force. We don't, so, as we said, we've no objection. But Wee Dan and the Cheeseball keep appealing to the code, so we wonder how they can justify their flouting its strictures. Apparently they don't have to worry in Traddielandia, where the insentient culties let these two clowns (three, if you count the disrespected rector) get away with all manner of absurdities.

We interject, as an aside, that all "training" in the substandard U.S. Traddie "seminaries" ought to be considered private inasmuch as these unregulated priest mills have no connection to the visible institutional Church. 

OLDTHINKER UNBELLYFEELS DUCKSPEAK*

It's a beautiful thing, the Destruction of words. Orwell

The Mad Mullah of Tradistan strikes again!

In his latest fatwā (viz., the December 2013 Most Holy Trinity Seminary Newsletter), the ragin' rector reprises his cretinous attacks on Bergoglio's characterization of traditionalists as neo-pelagian. "Dumbo Don" turgidly insists Bergie's use of the term "is a manifestation both of his ignorance concerning the nature of the heresy, as well as a stupidity in applying it to us." (Ed. Note: Yes, we know: We've corrected this painfully slow learner before on this point, but the Readers believe his persistence of imprecision calls for a reminder.)

Apart from the fractured syntax, the rector, who's always trying to revive his dead-on-arrival uprising against Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX, blindly misses what Papa Pancho's up to. That's more than stupid: that's downright dangerous.  P²'s word choice is not a "manifestation": it's a manifesto -- and lots of folks (including Traddie youth) are signing on.

Papa Pancho is leveraging the star-power of his office to own the debate by fixing the definitions. It's the skilled polemicist's ploy to gain the upper hand in any dispute. The new rhetoric of Vatican II gives him the cover he needs to broaden and distort -- the Conciliarists would probably say enrich -- the dictionary meaning. A fawning, collaborating "Catholic" world press makes it all seem orthodox.

Bergo couldn't care less about the pedantic scoldings of an out-of-touch mental pip-squeak like the rector because he has the whip hand. How else could Pancho have gotten away with his Protestant-like dismissal of a spiritual bouquet of 3,500 or so rosaries and made it sound Catholic when he said these pious gestures don't exist anymore⁉ That alone, we should think, merits his appearance on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine.

Like all authentic progressives, Bergie is a shrewd totalist who views language as the chief means of securing the revolution through thought reform and control. His intuitive understanding of semantic tactics in an era of mass-communication skirmishes and celebrity worship makes him, in fact, the most formidable Modernist corsair ever to lead a boarding party onto the Barque of Peter. Writing off Pancho as stupid and ignorant is madness, a sure token the battle is lost.

If the rector had been properly trained in real academic institutions, he would have detected in Bergoglio's writing all the features of Orwellian linguistic theory. Untrained as he is, hidebound in his thinking, cut off from the current of history, flailing "Big Don" can't manage to connect the dots. Pancho and his cadre of ghost writers and Modernist theologians know perfectly well the classic definitions of pelagian and neo-pelagian. To think otherwise is to underestimate fatally an enemy with a big idea.

The Modernists are convinced that language determines, or at least strongly influences, thought. What's more, they're past masters in building both equivalence and issue frames to manipulate perception. At its monstrous birth, the Novus Ordo exchanged the Church's age-old code of precise theological expression for a kind of amorphous ecclesiastical Newspeak. Its terminology is fluid. Vocabulary shifts endlessly in a calculated effort to eliminate all meanings other than those favored by the revolutionary élite -- especially those meanings that threaten to subvert the new thought-climate. Words and their concepts are so fundamentally altered that they controvert their lexical signification. This radical redefinition of the elements of discourse has but one objective: to support the overarching revolutionary policy, which in this case is what George Orwell called the "continuous alteration of the past."

If Traddielandia weren't so destitute of intellectual capital, its petty chieftains could launch a cool-headed, persuasively reasoned campaign to expose Bergie's rhetorical chicanery. People, now worried about how powerful forces collude to manipulate their thinking, might be willing to pay attention to a sober analysis of Papa Pancho's deadly strategy. If competently done, such an analysis could possibly open some Novus Ordites' eyes to the heresiarch's psychological alienation from unchanging Catholic truth. 

That, however, would require both a rigorous education and an honest acknowledgment of the enemy's strengths. More importantly, it would also entail forsaking all the shrill name-calling, a guttersnipe's exercise useless against Bergoglio's overwhelmingly positive media image. Even if the Bergomeister were stupid and ignorant (and Bergie is not), no one will listen because his public persona counsels otherwise. (That twinkle in his Jesuitical eye and the impish, grandfatherly smile would win 'em over every time!) Only the squirming, gibbering zombie culties, from whom cultured traditionalist Catholics of every stripe recoil in loathing, relish "Big Don's" ineffectual nastiness.

Tradistan's howling ghazies are incapable of the intellectual agility required to discredit Bergie and his tribe. Crippled by an unspeakably impoverished priestly formation and unable to think out of the box, they just don't get it. Their needle's stuck. The witless Poobahs, permanently mired in the eighties, rattle dull sabers against mirages while everyone else has moved on. The behind-the-times Panjandrums continue to raid madly the abandoned outposts of the Trad desert while a masterly foe lays claim to the oases, safe in the certain knowledge that his crazed detractors are harmless to everyone -- except to themselves.

THERE'S AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE OUTWITTED SEDE CULT MASTERS. BUT FIRST, YOU HAVE TO GET OUT!

* Why not translate the title yourself? Click here!

DOWN ARGENTINE WAY

When the money keeps rolling out, you don't keep books:/You can tell you've done well by the happy, grateful looks./Accountants only slow things down; figures get in the way. "Evita" (lyrics by Tim Rice)

Recently, "One Hand" took a pricey junket to Argentina to perform confirmations and at least one tonsure. Apparently, a chapel down there couldn't get another bishop, so they finally found a willing candidate (read chump?) in Deacon Dan to spend a pleasant holiday showing off for strangers who don't know his history. (From what Dannie wrote, it looks as though he was, at best, the third bishop invited.)

Although confirmation isn't necessary for salvation, we wouldn't begrudge Wee Dan a little escape from the blank faces and polar cold of SW Ohio cult central to enjoy some summertime swaggering and strutting south of the equator -- as long as the inviting organization (or Dannie himself) footed the bill, not the cash-strapped cult members.

A front-page story about Argentina's financial crisis in the January 24 Wall Street Journal got us to wondering if the two Argentine sibling-priests who invited him were even in a position to pay for the trip. For quite some time, Argentina has been experiencing capital flight and at the same time has been burning through its foreign-exchange reserves.  The situation is complex, but it all boils down to what the WSJ called a "dollar crunch."

Part of the continuing problem stems from the difference between the official exchange rate (6.5 Argentinian pesos per U.S. dollar when Li'l Dan was vacationing) and the rate available on the black market (around 10 per U.S. dollar at the time). People, always guided by prudentia carnis, were taking advantage of the spread: when a friend or relative from abroad intended to visit, they would buy his ticket in Argentina at the official exchange rate. When the traveler arrived with the dollar value of the ticket in cash, he then sold those dollars on the black market, pocketing a handsome, tidy profit. The government soon got wise and prohibited such enterprising speculation altogether.

Therefore, it's not too big a stretch to suppose that "One Hand" bought his ticket in the U.S. Nowadays, the price of a round-trip plane ticket from cult central U.S.A. to Argentina represents a huge amount of money down there. Based on Dannie's report about the poverty he encountered, it doesn't look as though his hosts could have reimbursed him -- either in dollars or in pesos.

In fact, it's highly improbable that "One Hand" would have accepted reimbursement in pesos (and if he did, he's dumber than we think). Sadly for this wonderful country, the Argentine peso is now almost worthless. So, dollars would have been the only option, and unless the two inviting priests had some greenbacks squirreled away, they would've had to buy dollars on the black market with cold, hard cash. The amount of local currency needed for the transaction would have been substantial. In our view, it would have amounted to a big sacrifice for something that was not absolutely necessary. (We must admit, though, that such an expenditure might make sense if the two priests were sending an oblique message to the other bishops who usually work with them.)

Now, if it is the case that "One Hand" acquired his own ticket, we have this question: Where did the money come from? Did Dannie use his own money or his accumulated airline miles? If the funds came from his own personal resources (frequent-flyer points, stipends, holiday gifts, salary etc.), then fine and dandy. However, if the money came from offerings the culties made to support their chapel and if the Argentines didn't reimburse "One Hand," then that's another matter altogether. It's always easy to be generous with someone else's money, isn't it?

When there are serious money/infrastructure problems in SW Ohio, it's tough to see how anyone could justify such an expenditure from the chapel's treasure to administer a sacrament not necessary for salvation in a far-away land that has its own bishop. "One-Hand Dan" didn't have to put on his travelin' shoes. The two priests could have waited until the traditional bishop living in Argentina was able to journey to their city. It's a simple matter of accountability despite the fact that the cult masters control all their chapels' assets, lock, stock, and barrel.  

Pistrina advises cult members to ask "One Hand" point-blank who paid for this unnecessary excursion. (They should also insist on getting documentary evidence.) After all, the faithful deserve to know how their hard-earned money is being spent; in justice, the cult masters owe their flock an accounting. Money is too tight here in the U.S. to sponsor therapeutic getaways to beautiful South-American locales just so Wee Dan can escape his stateside problems by pretending his failed "apostolate" is not on life support and he's still useful. Everybody knows he's as useless as aspirin in a leper colony.

If "One Hand" wasted his own money on this ego-boosting jaunt, then all you can do is pity the needy beggar. However, if it turns out that the cult center paid the freight, we advise each contributor to withhold weekly offerings until he or she individually recoups the total amount of the ticket. Thus, assuming the ticket cost $1,200, if only ten decent people were to participate, the cult would suffer a $12,000 decline in income in a short time. We bet the loss would make them think twice about their improvident ways in the future. 

Now, just think what would happen if there were 50 upright souls taking part!

MAKE SURE THE "PRODIGAL PRELATE" STAYS IN LINE. SEND THIS EPISCOPUS VAGANS AND PRÆSUL VIATOR THE MESSAGE THAT HE'S ACCOUNTABLE: STARVE THE BEAST.

UNPRINCIPLED INTEREST

In New York, boy, money really talks -- I'm not kidding. J.D. Salinger

The rector, our moles inform us, never tires of haranguing the pesthouse's pathologically credulous inmates on how very necessary a seminary formation is. It's almost an article of faith down in the lurid, fly-blown swamp. Yet, we find ourselves asking, if a seminary formation is essential, then why does the Flushing Rat allow "One Hand" to bring onto MHT's premises his new Bay-State protégé -- a man who never underwent formal seminary training? (For details, see last week's post below about "One Hand's" transgressive poison-pen letter.)

You'd think the ol' rector would never suffer the impressionable, feeble-minded inmates to come into contact with an outsider who obtained his orders without having set foot on a seminary. (Guided study is not a seminary formation*, in spite of what this Newbie might think.) Furthermore, it's not as though the Newbie was unaware of the existence of the pesthouse when he chose to take a shortcut to orders by apprenticing under a priest out West. Other wannabes who had college degrees later did time at the pesthouse, so you can't say he was just catching up on a few odds and ends he missed in his secular state university program. In fact, one wonders why, when the Newbie decided he "had to move towards going to seminary," he didn't get into contact with the rector right away. What kept him from applying? (The rector wouldn't like the answer, we assure you. He wouldn't like it one little bit! No, siree!)

Also, we wonder why, after the Newbie separated from the priest out West and found sanctuary at the SW Ohio cult center, Dannie did not insist he spend a year or two enduring the flies, heat, torrential storms, and mosquitoes at the swampland pesthouse. (At least he could have done a summer internship.) Shouldn't the Newbie first have "settled down to seminary life" (a phrase from "One Hand's" Nov. 21 nasty-gram)?

Dannie and goof-prone, "seminary professor" Tony Baloney are committed to the same formational philosophy as the rector, aren't they?  We thought the Terrible Trio had shared interests! Insofar as the rector stuck out his neck to save "One Hand" from becoming a big-box-store greeter during the 2009 SGG School Scandal, doesn't Deacon Dan have an obligation to support the swampland "seminary" mission by sending "Big Don" at least the Americans he plans to "ordain"? We're sure the rector would have welcomed with open and admiring arms a candidate who, by his own report, graduated with two degrees!

Yet in one published image, we see this well-nourished stranger to seminary life plopped down in a pesthouse group photo as though he belonged among them. Also, on the web, we think we spied him in sacred vestments at the Rev. Mr. Nkamuke's "ordination" in the pesthouse chapel. What kind of example does this offer to the distempered inmates, who must endure Scut the Prefect's flinty discipline, the energy-sapping drudgery of menial household chores, servile waiting upon the feeding cult masters, and mind-draining kitchen-police work?

If the rector truly believed a seminary formation were so fundamental and if that belief had risen to the level of principle, then it would seem that, as a matter of conscience, he could not allow a man so irregularly "formed" to cross the buzzing threshold of the pesthouse compound. The McNewbie's haphazard preparation for the priesthood should represent everything against which the rector has devoted both his life and the treasure of his benefactors, shouldn't it?

By now, everybody knows not to forage for consistent, principled action in the company of the Grand High Panjandrum and the Right Worshipful Poobah of Tradistan. Still it might be worth venturing a wild guess at motive, if only for the mental exercise: Could it be the rector senses that "One Hand" may be grooming this roughly formed but smooth-talking Johnny-come-lately as his successor? It's obvious to anyone that the other two flunkies carrying water for Dannie and the Blunderer aren't up to the challenge of keeping the cult center operating to support a comfortable, care-free retirement for "One Hand" in the chic and arty Southwest.

Perhaps the rector, acutely sensitive to the buttered side of his bread, calculated there's no need to ruffle the feathers of the turkey who may, one day not so very far off, be in charge of the cult-center collections and the checkbook. Everybody knows that alumni are more disposed to support their alma mater: What motivation is there for a non-completer like the Newbie except to pretend he's one of the old gang and hope for some handouts later?

Self-interested "Big Don" certainly doesn't want to jeopardize those periodic remittances of the laity's hard-earned cash. In Traddielandia, where King Mammon reigns sovereign, the smarter cult masters -- that excludes the Bonehead, whose offbeat theological antics (for starters, think Terri Schiavo, Leonine prayers, and una cum) have visited big-dollar setbacks on the cult -- know it's always in their best interest to park their shape-shifting principles at the door when there's a risk of losing a few bucks. That's also why the rector still plays the hireling to an Arizona lay board despite his firm resolve against lay governance.

As they might might say in certain worldly-wise, New-York neighborhoods: Principles-schmincibles!

THE DANNIE-DONNIE CABAL IS WAY PAST ITS EXPIRATION DATE. TOSS IT OUT NOW.

* For the record: Pistrina is not at all averse to such a formation. It's far better than the current fiction of Trad "seminaries" as genuine institutions of sacred learning. (Think of the  forgetful "Skipper" in Michigan or the Frenchman who couldn't bless holy water without a crisis). The Readers merely wish to make public "One Hand's" and the rector's hypocrisy.

THE POISON PEN

And forthi, who that hath an hed of verre,/Fro cast of stones war hym in the werre! Chaucer*

The optics are always harsh in brutish Traddielandia. The feral cult masters never weary of beastly mischief-making and hypocrisy. For all their transparent efforts to appear benevolent, their lupine instincts ever find a way to manifest themselves. By nature, they cannot forbear from breeding dissension and alarming the laity in their manic drive for a control long ago lost to them.

Pistrina received an example of a recent effort to disturb the spiritual peace of a distant Catholic community. "One Hand Dan" sent a letter dated November 21, 2013, to a body of laymen (below we print his very words in blue). It contains a scurrilous attack on a young priest, in which a foaming Li'l Dan enviously snarled, "we should not even consider this man a valid priest." (His emphasis.) In every way, Dannie's vile letter is a classic example of the pot's calling the kettle black.

We'll revisit this nasty-gram again during 2014, but for today we limit our remarks to the reasons "One Hand" alleges for eliminating the man "from consideration as a Catholic priest." You'll see how Dannie convicts himself while he savagely struggles to impugn a Catholic priest whose possession of the priesthood is more certain than his own.

Just for laughs, we'll entertain the fiction that canon law operates. Of course, you and we know that, in the Sede Vacante, the 1917 Codex Juris Canonici has no more force than Hammurabi's code does in modern Iraq or the XII Tables** in today's Lazio. But, since "One Hand" brazenly invokes the code to legitimize his unprovoked, animalistic attack, we'll appeal to it, too, in order to expose his hypocrisy.

THE BEAST BITES ITS OWN BACK

Wee Dan charges that the young priest is canonically unfit according to c. 974.1. That's a particularly embarrassing accusation for Dannie to make considering his own track record.  In 2012, "One-Hand Dan" himself ordained to the priesthood a man (1) who “had never completed a seminary academic program which properly tested his knowledge in Latin, Philosophy or Theology according to the mind of the Church as set forth in canon law and papal documents,”*** (2) who had never followed “a seminary rule,” and (3) who had never demonstrated “the requisite regularity of life” by attending a seminary, not even the grossly deficient swampland pesthouse. The man merely studied for a while under a busy priest who runs an active chapel.

Now, folks, at best that's a tutorial, not a seminary!

This man later separated from that priest and then studied "independently" for a short time at the cult center before "One Hand" ordained him a priest at his home chapel on the East Coast. Shortly afterwards, he abandoned that chapel to return to the SW Ohio cult center. (That's an instructive story in itself, which deserves a full telling someday on this blog.)

WHAT ARE WE TO THINK?

The following questions immediately come to mind:

In light of Dannie's opinion, should this man, who now works at the cult center and its missions, not be considered a priest?

Additionally, since Dannie wrote,"a bishop who ordains such a candidate 'sins most gravely' (c. 973.3)," did Dan himself, then, sin mortally by ordaining such a man? Did he commit "a sin 'against the public good, which is harmed exceedingly by unworthy ministers' (Regatillo, Jus Sacramentum, 919)"? 

 Or, is rule-tweaking "One-Hand Dan" exempt from the severe standards by which he condemns others? 

LET'S LOOK AT THE CODE OURSELVES

Now if, in spite of the inherent absurdity, canonical fitness is to be a standard in the Sede Vacante, then we must consider Dannie’s own worthiness for the episcopacy. Canon 331 sets forth several criteria whereby we may judge his canonical fitness, four of which are:

✭ A doctorate or at least a licentiate in sacred theology acquired from a school approved by
the Holy See;

✭ Good character;

✭ Zeal for souls;

✭ Prudence.

Dannie possesses no advanced degree or a license from an approved institution. He has never demonstrated in the public forum that he is well-versed in the sacred sciences or canon law. As for his character, in his own state and in the city where he resides, there are many former members of his chapels who hold him in deepest contempt, as do many clergy throughout North America, Latin America, and Europe. He did not display zealousness for souls when his meddling a few years ago in Chambéry, France, resulted in a well-loved priest's departure from the little chapel there.  Likewise, at the cult center in 2008 and 2009, he did not exercise prudence when, by refusing to discipline an errant employee, his chapel was irremediably divided in the wake of the calamitous SGG School scandal.

A MOST CONVENIENT OVERSIGHT

The letter’s most laughable charges are those leveled against the licitness and validity of the young man's priestly orders. To our great amusement, "One Hand" appears to have forgotten that his own consecration and ordination as well as the 14 ordinations he has conferred over the years are themselves, strictly speaking, illicit and hence “an act that church law considered mortally sinful.”

His episcopal candidacy in the United States was never proposed by the Holy See through the Apostolic Delegate nor approved by a vote of the Bishops in his province. Like all sedevacantist clergy, "One Hand’s" orders are illicit in the strict sense. At best, he's a mere episcopus vagans with no jurisdiction, no authority, and no mandate from the institutional Church -- that is, if he is a bishop at all: there's no guarantee that the defect of a one-handed ordination is accidental, and remember: he's never obtained conditional orders to cure the defect and end all speculation.

WHAT WAS HE THINKING WHEN HE WROTE TO THOSE PEOPLE?

If his hateful missive weren't so destructively mischievous, you'd feel sorry for such an absence of self-awareness. He sounds like a malign and embittered orphan cruelly taunting a fatherless child for having a single mother. The normal person wonders how "One Hand" cannot see his own exposure to the very charges he laid against the young priest. But, then, if he could, he wouldn't be in the predicament he is, would he? One's true character will always prevail.

Popular culture, sociology, psychology, and psychiatry all have terms to describe such lost souls. Feel free to select the one you feel most apropos, for they all capture a behavior condemned and ridiculed in the real world.

A LEOPARD CAN'T CHANGE ITS SPOTS

You'll note that we were amused at his hypocrisy, but not astonished. We know all the cult masters too well. They refuse to practice what they preach. Another pregnant example is the case of Dannie's not seeking re-ordination after the nine priests denounced his one-handed ordination. Repetition of his priestly orders should have been the first solution to his dilemma, if he had truly believed the words of the 1984 "A Statement of Principles in a Time of Crisis," to which he, Checkie, and "Big Don" subjoined their names along with those of nine other priests:

In the practical order, in the course of our pastoral activity, the Church obliges us to require the reiteration according to the traditional rites, either conditionally or absolutely, as the case may be, of any sacrament conferred in a doubtful or invalid manner. We refer the final determination of the validity or invalidity of the doubtful sacraments to the judgment of the Church when a normal state or affairs shall be restored.

If principles are truly principles in the Catholic sense, then (we're sure you'd agree) they must apply in every case that falls under the language used. In other words, principles must stand above any law of convenience.

But we know better, don't we? It's always only about the cult masters, and principles must be bent or broken or reformulated to suit their ad-hoc needs.

In Trad World's bleak and fatal woods, where dark-souled clerics prowl and brood, one law alone there rules: unprincipled expediency.

*Lit: "And, therefore, let him who has a head of glass beware of hurling stones in battle."

** A pity for chapels mismanaged by money squandering cultmasters that V.7 is not universally in force: prodigo interdicitur bonorum suorum administratio,"a spendhrift is forbidden the administration of his own goods."

*** We wonder how much philosophy Dannie himself has studied and knows. It would be nice to get him to answer that question on the record. We think older priests who know him well would be interested in his answer.

LEAPIN' LIZARDS, PART 4

All I did was tell you - you did the rest. Little Orphan Annie, the comic strip.

After three weeks, we're sure most of you get the idea: It's more than just possible that "One Hand Dan's" consecration did not assure his possession of the priesthood, if the defective one-handed priestly ordination rite denounced by nine priests in 1990 failed to confect the sacrament.  And if he wasn't a priest at the time of his consecration 20 years ago, then he's not a bishop now. But in case there are a few addlebrained cultists out there who haven't yet felt the shock of recognition, we'll conclude our series by citing the opinion of the venerable Arthur Vermeersch, S.J.:

The episcopate...is a sacrament so distinct from the simple presbyterate that not only do inferior priests lack the power conferred by episcopal consecration, but also, at least according to several [authors], that the episcopate does not contain the simple priesthood, [lacuna in original print version] priestly ordination having been bypassed, it would be invalidly conferred... (Author's emphasis.)*

Li'l Dan's reflexive defenders should realize they have to persuade him to see his way clear to undergoing conditional ordination and consecration. "One Hand" must for once consider the needs of the laity and act to relieve their unease. Read, now, with pious eyes the words of Henry Davis, S.J., on this matter (bold-face emphases ours):

…whenever a prudent doubt based on probable reasons persists regarding the validity of a Sacrament bestowed, that Sacrament may be repeated (c. 732,2), and it is to be observed that when the good of others is at stake or the mental anxiety of the recipient is concerned, repetition may the more readily be conceded.  The repetition of the Sacrament ought to be done where its validity is doubted — or rather, so long as its validity is not morally certain — in cases when the Sacrament is necessary, whether absolutely and of its nature, as Baptism, or relatively and in respect of the good of others, as Ordination, absolution, Extreme Unction. Consequently, in doubt as to validity, Baptism, Ordination, absolution of the dying, Extreme Unction of the unconscious, and consecration of doubtfully consecrated hosts, must be repeated.*

The holier-than-thou culties out there who breathlessly rhapsodize on the necessity of true sacraments need to get their act together if they really believe all the lovely pieties they repeat. If Catholics are truly obliged to do anything necessary to assure access to true sacraments, then "One Hand" had better do his part to make sure there isn't the tiniest sliver of doubt about those he administers. So far, he doesn't appear to have done anything to remedy the defect, so it's time for brow-beaten cultists to stand tall before diminutive Dan. 

We ask them to tell Wee "One-Hand" that he's got to get fixed for the good of souls. Instruct him that Cekada's error-filled, bush-league monograph on one-handed orders is toast. (Actually, Catholic prudence dictates that, for the good of others, even if gross mistranslation, faulty scholarship, slovenly mistranscription, and shameless special pleading had not impeached the Blunderer's article, Dannie should have sought re-ordination before his consecration two decades ago, just to be perfectly safe: it's the Catholic way, you know.)

Without appeal to that now discredited monograph, "One Hand" can no longer be morally certain of the validity of his priesthood and episcopate. Culties still capable of acting on conscience are obliged to insist that the faithful must have unqualified confidence in the validity of the sacraments they receive from his hands, even if he doesn't give a tinker's damn for the integrity of his own orders. Let him know that if he refuses to put the faithful before self, you will withdraw all financial and material support.

DO IT, IF NOT FOR YOURSELF, THEN, AS DANNIE'S BEEN KNOWN TO SAY, "DO IT FOR THE CHILDREN."

* Theologia Moralis, III, (Università Gregoriana, 3rd Edition), p.554, ❡619.  Episcopatus ... est sacramentum a simplici presbyteratu ita distinctum ut non tantum inferiores sacerdotes careant potestate collata per consecrationem episcopalem, sed etiam, saltem secundum plures, ut episcopatus simplicem presbyrteratum non contineat, [lacuna of 8 characters in printed text] praetermissa ordinatione sacerdotali, invalide conferretur... (Author's emphasis.)

*Moral and Pastoral Theology, Volume Three, (Sheed and Ward, 1943), p. 25.

LEAPIN' LIZARDS, PART 3

Aw, why lose sleep over a bird like that. He sure looks like a bad one. Little Orphan Annie, the comic strip

We're continuing in the same vein as in the past weeks to show you we don't need to cherry-pick in order to make our point about "One Hand's" urgent need of conditional ordination and consecration, provided he wants to play it safe as a Catholic should. Today, let's see what the Jesuit Noldin had to say about jumping to the episcopate without valid priestly orders.

As late as 1960, the editor of the 32nd edition of Noldin's Summa Theologiae Moralis still could print the following:

Whether the episcopate is an order distinct from the presbyterate or a kind of extension and complement of the priesthood itself, is disputed. Nevertheless, it is more commonly affirmed that, when the priesthood has not yet been conferred, the episcopate cannot be validly conferred.*

So here we have another vote backing Pistrina's advice to "One Hand."  It's surely clear by now why Dannie's episcopal orders may not be enough. Oh, sure, the whole question of the leap is in dispute, and admittedly, we lack sufficient information to determine with certainty whether one-handed priestly orders are valid or not. And we won't know anything substantial until the Restoration, and maybe even then the world may have to wait for who knows how long to get a definitive decision. So, then ... wouldn't it just be better all around to play it safe now to assure the integrity of Dannie's Masses, absolutions, and ordinations, especially since the fix is so painless and easy? Wouldn't it also be better for the 14 sorry losers he "ordained"? Dannie could then re-ordain them all and ease their painful future.

And since we've cited the mighty Noldin in this post, we might as well hear what he has to say about the famous axiom in dubio pars tutior eligenda est -- "in doubt, the safer side must be chosen."

The Blunderer and his aping chorus of insolent e-viewers insist the axiom "applies only to a choice between a morally safe course of action and a morally unsafe one" (Cheeseball's emphasis.)  However, Noldin (p. 220, ❡236 [β]) instructs us that the axiom applies "where it is a question of the validity of the sacrament (ubi agitur de valore sacramenti)." Indeed, "where...it is a question of a matter on which the validity of a sacrament depends, the certain means must be chosen (ubi...agitur de re, a qua valor sacramenti dependet, eligendum est medium certum)."

In other words, we are bound to follow the safer course when the validity of a sacrament is at stake, which is what we, and many others, have been saying all along. And since we don't know for sure whether one-handed conferral of priestly orders is an invalidating defect or not, this is the right occasion to opt for the safer side. The sacraments are just too important to run any risk at all, even a slight one. (Although, we suspect, the defect of one-handed ordination renders the risk more than slight, particularly in view of the Holy Office's documented practice of re-consecration in related questions.)

"One Hand" has a duty of care to get himself fixed because the risk of being wrong in this matter touching upon the sacrament of orders carries so many deadly consequences. His failure to do so is telling. It illustrates how far removed the cult masters are from a genuinely Catholic frame of mind. Rather than seeking conditional orders and consecration, i.e., acting in the interest of the care of souls (the first law), Dannie thinks that by repeating over and over that he's producing undoubtedly valid priests, everybody will ignore his BIG problem. (Just read a sampling of some of his recent missives -- you'll catch the motif immediately.)

And why won't he get fixed? Pride? Arrogance? Fear of wounding the perpetually wrong Bonehead's feelings? Insouciance? Sloth? A gambler's love of risk-taking? A constitutional antipathy to the exquisite Roman sense of justice, charity, and religion?

Nobody knows the real answer, but it's obvious that the whole cult is no more than just-pretend Catholicism. The brilliant constellation of precise knowledge, spiritual disposition, and rightly motivated action that furnish true Catholic guidance is simply not present in Trad World's pitchy firmament. No amount of dolly-dress-up pageants and cloyingly saccharine missives can make up for its absence.

Just-pretend priests and prelates. Ersatz clerics. Make-believe seminaries.  Sham scholars.  Phony theologians. In counterfeit Cultilandia, these cheap knock-offs are seemingly good enough as long as the money keeps coming in. Just don 't you try giving the cult masters any wooden nickels! They themselves may be bogus, but they insist on genuine coin of the realm from their blinded and undemanding followers. Your prayers or straitened finances won't buy European trips with fancy hotels, wintertime South-American junkets, and chic desert-spa vacations.

Sick of the pretense and hypocrisy? Repelled by the theater of hauteur and the impertinent expectation of unmerited privilege? Would you like to clean up the whole mess?

RESOLVE TO STARVE THE BEAST IN 2014.

* Summa Theologiae Moralis (32nd editiion, Felician Rauch, 1960), p. 390, ❡454,1. Utrum episcopatus sit ordo a presbyteratu distinctus, an extensio quaedam et complementum ipsius sacerdotii, disputatur. Illud tamen communius affirmatur episcopatum, nondum collato sacerdotio, valide conferri non posse.