“TRINOs”: Today’s Pharisees

A popular political acronym of today is “RINO” (which stands for Republican In Name Only).  These are Republicans (America’s nominally conservative political party) who really aren’t conservative.  We’d like to borrow from that designation, and coin another term: “TRINO” (TRaditional In Name Only), “TRINO” being a “Traditional” Catholic who – like the cult-masters at SGG -- is only “cosmetically” Catholic.  What brought on this notion was a recent news story about a county clerk in Kentucky -- Kim Davis -- who refused to issue a marriage license for two homosexuals who wanted to get “married.”  Because “same-sex marriages” are now recognized as legal in the U.S., the woman was found “in contempt of court,” and sent to jail, where a federal U.S. Judge said she would remain until she “recanted” her position.

This woman, who is from a small rural county in Kentucky (Rowan County), is most probably not Catholic, let alone, “traditional”; yet, here she is, standing up for Christian beliefs that every Catholic should be ready to do as well.  One would think that a Catholic – especially a traditional Catholic – would, given the same set of circumstances, leap at the chance to emulate this brave woman’s behavior – or at least to show support for her actions.  Yet Dannie Dolan’s only comment about her was the following, in his Sept. 6, 2015 Bishop’s Corner: “Kentucky’s poster lady for marriage turns out to be not much of one. She has been ‘married’ four times, and her current husband is not her husband.”  (Thank you, Dannie for your pharisaic show of non-support!)

Now it just so happens that there is another woman (who lives in New York) who has a job similar to that of the Kentucky lady – and who is not only a “traditional Catholic,” but has a son who is a traditional Catholic bishop.  Did she take a stand against “same-sex marriage”?  Did she risk going to jail for her beliefs?  No, she did not.  In fact, she has been issuing “marriage” licenses to homosexual couples for several years – well before the Supreme Court’s “same-sex marriage” decision was enacted.  Has she had any remorse (or even second thoughts) about it?  Or has her son raised any objections to what she does -- or has he told her to quit doing it?  Or has Dannie made any snide remarks about her?  The answer to all these questions is NO.*

And is this New York woman’s refusal to stand up for her Catholic principles some sort of a “fluke”?  Is her example “atypical”?  Is this the “exception to the rule”?  Again, unfortunately, the answer is NO.  In Traddieland, it seems that – more often than not -- Catholic principles take a back seat to “appearances.”  Their preoccupation with looking good takes precedence over being good.  They make sure that the correct rites and rubrics are observed right down to the “nth” degree; but when it comes to standing up for Catholic principles, they hide behind a shameful shield of silence.

How many “traddie” clerics, for instance came out and condemned Tony Cekada’s monstrous justification of Terri Schiavo’s slow, methodical murder?  Precious few.  Most stayed on the sidelines, not taking any position, for fear of “offending” Dannie and Tony.  (Big Don, the Brooksville puppy-mill’s kennel-master, of course, didn’t say anything against his buddy Tony.  In fact, he actually endorsed his position.  And the CMRI, although they didn’t show active support, said nothing against it.  They were notably silent.)**

Sadly, traddie clerics often remain strangely silent (or non-committal) on everything that really counts.  But on things that serve their own self-interest, they're conspicuously active.  Dannie and Tony, for instance, have denied the sacraments to parishioners who have broken their “rules” (e.g., going to an SSPX chapel while on vacation); and they habitually DENY Extreme Unction (and refuse to say Requiem Masses) for people who are blood relatives of SGG parishioners, but who are not “traditional.”  This is their “policy.”  Yet, in the case of one parishioner, they gave his “Novus Ordo” spouse a “triple-play” Requiem Mass (three priests celebrating three Masses simultaneously).  Why this exception to their “rule”?  The reason was that this parishioner was a BIG DONOR, and the others weren’t.***

In another case involving another well-known traditional group, a wealthy parishioner was granted permission to receive a “donor” heart for their daughter, i.e., “harvest” one from a living donor who is then left to die – a clear violation of both natural and supernatural law – and certainly of Catholic moral principles.  And, although not so blatantly monstrous as Cekada’s position on Schiavo, it was nevertheless an act of spineless indecision and hypocrisy –  because its determining criterion was MONEY.

Too often, these traddie clergy – like the Pharisee in the parable -- are quick to condemn the “publican” on the minutest of “details” – yet they themselves ignore BASIC Catholic moral principles on a wholesale basis.  For them to deny the sacraments to ANYONE who asks for them – traddie or not – is not only a mortal sin, but a violation of Church teaching and Church law as well.  The real irony here is that these men who throw their weight around like that have, in fact, NO AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER to promulgate and/or to enforce their dictums.  Yet they command and condemn at will and whim, cajoling whomever they can to fall for their line of crap, and profiting at whomever’s expense they can. 

Dannie, of course, is the arch-type of this model: the self-serving, pretentious, “do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do” tinhorn.  And his hateful (and totally unwarranted) remark about that woman in Kentucky reinforces the conclusions made in our last article: that he’s getting desperate, and lashing out at everybody.  More and more, his vicious nature is surfacing.  (We wager that, if he had lived back in our Lord’s time, he would have been right there with those Pharisees, ready to stone Mary Magdalene to death – and to condemn our Lord for “consorting with prostitutes.”)  The rest of Traddieland not only needs to stop emulating Dannie’s behavior, but to condemn it – openly and publicly.  We don’t need any more acquiescent, spineless ninnies sitting on the sidelines.  We don’t need any more TRINOs.

_________________________

* The Kentucky woman, for all her sins, stood up for marriage – and risked going to jail for it -- something that this New York woman had not the courage (and character) to do – but who, like many other traddies, compromised her principles, hoping (and figuring) that no one would notice.  Dannie, of course, was fully aware of the New York woman’s “situation,” but said nothing about it (because one does not “tell” on a fellow traddie).  Instead, he denounced the Kentucky “sinner,” giving her absolutely no credit whatsoever for having the courage to do what she did – typical Dannie!  Notice also that in his Sept. 13 ‘Corner, he even managed to berate the Polish king who in 1683 helped Vienna save Christendom from Islam by noting that “The Polish King was also a Free Mason.”   Thank you again, Dannie, for adding that little morsel of unnecessary ingratitude!

** Even the much-revered Fr. Martin Stepanich – although he stated that Terri Sciavo’s death was deplorable, did not make any public outcry about it (he only made his comments in a private letter, which only became public later, when it was re-printed on the Christ or Chaos website); even so, he did not come out and actually condemn Anthony Cekada for what he said about Schiavo).  Only Fr. William Jenkins and a few more came out publicly to condemn him for what he said.  Stepanich also roundly defended Dannie and Tony after the 2009 school scandals, and would not countenance any criticism directed against them.

*** The woman for whom the “triple-play” funeral was held was not only “Novus Ordo,” but was one who loathed Dannie and Tony.  For years up to the time she died, she never set foot inside SGG – yet she got this elaborate funeral that NO ONE else at SGG has gotten before or since.  Why?  Again, because her husband was a big donor.  Now you might think that Dannie’s “no funeral for non-traddies” rule might have been waived for other “prominent” parishioners.  No, it wasn’t – not if they didn’t have “big bucks” to donate.  The determining criterion always has been – and always will be -- MONEY.