Rotten to the Core

The latest (November 1) Pistrina Liturgica article reported about an ordination that recently took place at Sacred Heart Chapel in Lawrence, Massachusetts, and about a certain sede clergyman’s abortive attempt to disrupt that ordination.  It seems that this “clergyman” phoned one their priests, and told him out that the young ordinand lacked the proper seminary formation to become a priest.  Pistrina also pointed out that this chapel is the one where Daniel Dolan ordained(?) another young man who too did not have seminary formation – a man who served that chapel for a time, but subsequently quit it (thus leaving them without a priest) to come and join Dolan's cult center in southwest Ohio.  [The “priest” who quit them was, of course, “Uneven Steven” – the same man who embarrassed himself so badly on Steven Heiner’s Restoration Radio.]

The attempted smearing of the newly-ordained priest prompted Bishop Morello to write a letter defending the young man.  And, of course, Bishop Morello – being a man of true character (unlike the moral leper who tried to discredit the new priest) – had the charity not to mention the slanderer’s name, but only to state that “an ecclesiastic of prominent hierarchy… called a trustworthy priest on the phone, asserting that we would be ordaining a candidate who lacks sufficient formation.”  Now what kind of person would clandestinely call up to question the young man’s credentials – and, by inference, cast doubt on Bishop Morello’s judgment?  What kind of person, not affiliated in any way with that chapel, would be so brazen, so underhanded, as to make unsolicited contact with them in order to disrupt something that was none of his business? 

Well, strange as it may seem, almost exactly the same thing happened a few years back: the day before a man was to be ordained by Bp. Paul Petko, someone contacted Bp. Petko urging him not to ordain the man.  This “someone” was one of SGG’s out-of-town frequenters – a man to whom Daniel Dolan recently referred as his “honorary Gertrudian.”  Concurrent with that, rumors were also being spread, discrediting Bp. Petko himself.  Now one could make a case that this “honorary Gertrudian” acted “on his own,” and was not deputized to do so by the southwest Ohio cult-masters -- or that those rumors were also none of their doing.  But one could also make a case that the Easter Bunny is for real.  Whatever the case, none of these efforts were to any avail: that ordination, just like the one in Massachusetts, went off without a hitch.  The only thing that the perpetrators managed to accomplish by their clumsy efforts was to provide proof of their involvement.

Are there any other instances of characters being attacked or discredited, other than this?  You bet there are!  Perhaps one of the "cheapest shots” was Anthony Cekada’s discrediting of a deceased man (who therefore couldn’t defend himself): the late Abbot Leonard Giardina.  In a May, 2011 article, Cekada had this to say about the recently-deceased abbot: 

“Fr. Giardiana was studiously coy about revealing his position on the question of the pope. As far as I know, he never made any public statements one way or the other.”  Cekada then continued: “Father’s caginess on the pope question and his repeated ‘We’re-too-spiritual-for-controversies’ protests, though, struck me as nothing more than a clever two-pronged fundraising ploy:  (1) Say absolutely nothing about the pope, so you can hit up all categories of traditionalists for donations: sedevacantists, SSPX-ers, independents, and Motu types.  (2) Play up the ‘I’m-only-a-humble-unworldly-monk’ routine.  On the latter point, having spent some time as a monk myself, I am well aware how some of the sons of St. Benedict ham up the ‘humble monk’ shtick whenever they sniff the scent of a potential big benefactor.  The double formula was a gold mine for Christ the King Abbey. Fr. Giardina played it to the hilt, and the bucks rolled in.”

Needless to say, Tony’s comments were anything but complimentary.  But, as cheap a shot as they were, his boss Dannie Dolan took an even cheaper one that made Tony’s remarks look downright innocuous.  In a letter to the people of Chambéry (in southeastern France), Derogatory Dan totally slammed a young French priest – and even his parents.  If one reads this letter, the venomous bias is embarrassingly obvious.  Of course, this isn’t the first time Dannie has done such a thing.  He also did the same to that priest ordained by Bp. Petko – and for the same “crime”: administering to the people of Chambéry.  But this time, he did it by “deputy”: he had Fr. Thomas Le Gal do the dirty deed for him, calling this priest a “destroyer,” amongst other things. 

This “destroyer,” by the way, was the same priest who, in his pre-ordination days, was a teacher at SGG; and, because he was a foreign national, his “papers” were supposed to have been “taken care of” by Anthony Cekada.  Not only did Cekada NOT do that, but – because the man opposed the scandalous events of 2009 at SGG’s school -- he had him subsequently dismissed from SGG – after which he turned him in to Homeland Security in an effort to get him deported.  But, like the cartoon character Wile E. Coyote, all of Tony’s efforts came to naught: the man is now a practicing priest, safely back in the U.S.

Now the reason for recalling these instances of the SGG clergy’s past behavior – all of which are easily verified -- is to examine them again, in light of what recently happened in Lawrence, Massachusetts.  Concerning that, in his letter defending the newly ordained priest, Bp. Morello disclosed only that “an ecclesiastic of prominent hierarchy [our emphasis] called a trustworthy priest on the phone, asserting that we would be ordaining a candidate who lacks sufficient formation.”  Now it is safe to say that an “ecclesiastic of prominent hierarchy” is probably NOT a priest -- nor is he an archbishop or above (because there are none of that rank in traddieland these days).  That leaves – you guessed it – “bishop.” 

Now, let us pose the following questions:  First, how many traddie bishops are there who have -- or had -- an earlier interest in (or association with) Sacred Heart Chapel?  Secondly, now that SHC has their new priest, who is it that will no longer benefit from any such past association -- or be able to take control of their chapel?  Thirdly, who is it that might now see that chapel as a “rival”?  And lastly, who has a track record of discrediting people whom they consider rivals, or whom they perceive as “threatening their turf”?  Now it is theoretically possible that this mysterious “ecclesiastic of prominent hierarchy” could be any one of traddieland’s bishops.  But, unfortunately for this “ecclesiastic,” news of it leaked out, so the “mystery” is solved -- and it is fast becoming traddieland’s “worst kept secret.”

Now this ecclesiastic’s supporters might “cry foul” and blame Bp. Morello for divulging his identity -- but he DID NOT (nor was he party to any such undertaking).  No, the blame goes entirely to that “ecclesiastic” himself, for how could he ever think that such a deed would go unnoticed?  News like that invariably spreads.  And the truth is, it deserved and needed to be spread.  And the truth also is that, whether or not this ecclesiastic’s name was actually mentioned, it didn’t have to be: people simply asked themselves who might do such a thing, and then “put two an two together.”  For anyone other than an absolute moron, it was an easy deduction.

Of course, this ecclesiastic’s supporters will probably blame everyone outside their sphere (including us) for even mentioning that he had made that phone call to SHC.  They'll probably call the reporting of the deed "slander" -- as if the deed itself wasn't --  and they'll fail to blame this ecclesiastic himself.  They'll fail to admit that what he did was indefensible and was EVIL – and they'll fail to see that their pharisaic cries of "slander" do not alter or diminish that deed itself, or justify it.  They'll also fail to blame themselves for not facing up to the obvious maliciousness of his act, just as they have failed to do so many times in the past.  And why?  Pride, that’s why: pure, simple, “never-admit-that-they’re-wrong” pride – and cowardice.

These folks, it seems, will never face up to reality; but, perhaps, they will.  The rest of traddieland HAS wised up.  For them, this latest episode at SHC is just one more "nail in the coffin" that has already destroyed whatever little esteem (and credibility) this “ecclesiastic” has left.  And even for this “ecclesiastic’s” gullible followers, the sheer underhandedness of his act cannot help but be recognized – if only a little.  And recognition, like a leak in a dike, often starts out as a trickle -- but becomes a torrent.  Perhaps this trickle has started for some of them; or perhaps it will the next time.  And, rest assured, there will be a “next time,” because this vindictive wretch will never change -- or quit.