Saturday, November 28, 2015

There Are None So Blind…

Perhaps the most famous passage in the New Testament -- aside from the account of our Lord’s passion and death -- is St. Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians (thirteenth chapter).  It begins with these words:

If I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.  And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

So then, if I do all sorts of wondrous things, but have not charity, it makes me nothing.  Now if that is the case, what if I do all sorts of not-so-wondrous things and have not charity?  What does that make me then?  Well, let’s re-write that epistle again – but, this time, in that light -- and then ask ourselves that same question again.  Here goes:

If I speak with histrionic affectation, and stage elaborate pontifical Masses, processions, and other ecclesiastical extravaganzas ad nauseam, and if my Masses have polyphonic music, accompanied by a new (unneeded) nine zillion watt ├╝ber-organ (sometimes with violin and trumpet fanfare), and if my church decorations win the Nobel Pomposity Prize® for ostentation, but I deny the sacraments to someone for attending an "una cum" Mass, what does that make me?

And if I stage a “triple-play” funeral (Three Masses celebrated simultaneously) for the novus ordo spouse of a rich parishioner (and major benefactor), but deny the same to someone in similar circumstances, but who is NOT so well-to-do, what does that make me?

If I wax poetic about protecting our innocent children on Guardian Angel Sunday, but have a child beaten with a wooden paddle for missing his homework, yet dismiss the school principal’s sons’ watching of porn as “boys will be boys,” what does that make me?

If I exhort my parishioners, “Thou shalt not steal,” and then dispossess them (by selling their church out from under them, and confiscating not only the proceeds from that sale, but their $123,664 building fund as well), what does that make me?

If I preach about modesty, and lay down strict rules about dress codes, and ban body piercings, but say nothing when one of my school principal’s sons impregnates a fellow student, what does that make me?

If I go on “apostolates” to Europe (and to Argentina and the Baja to pig out on copious quantities of meat during Lent), but ask my parishioners to fast and abstain while they’re paying for my high heating bills,” what does that make me?

If I preach against “moral relativism,” but condone the starving and dehydrating to death of Terri Schiavo, what does that make me?

If I urge my parishioners to “do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” but clandestinely call a church in Lawrence, Massachusetts and then try to discredit the credentials of one of their ordination candidates, what does that make me?

And if I rail against calumny, but write an article about a deceased abbot (who, being deceased, can offer no rebuttal), and accuse him of being deceitful and mercenary, what does that make me?

Starting to get the picture here?  As to “What does that make me,” it certainly makes me something much worse than “sounding brass” or a “tinkling cymbal”!  Does it make me a hypocrite?  A traitor?  A liar?  A thief?  A scoundrel?  A moral leper?  A scurrilous, unprincipled roundworm?  How about “all of the above”?  Actually (as you might have guessed), “what that makes me” is an SGG cult-master.  And, of course, this updated “epistle” could actually go on and on.  So, we ask: with a track record like that, why do Dannie and Tony have any followers at all -- who not only follow them, but defend them as well?  Why is that so?

Why?  The reasons are the usual ones we've mentioned before: people have a natural sort of “inertia” – especially when it comes too religion – and especially when someone “puts on a good show” for them.  And when blended with cult-like manipulation and control, that makes for a potent (and lethal) combination.  Dannie and Tony have been able to do just that: to take advantage of traddies’ over-blown sense of “respect for the cloth” (and their “shut up and obey” mentality) to manipulate and intimidate them into doing whatever they decree – even to the point where they perjure themselves for them.*  

And even those who “know better” will usually give them the benefit of the doubt, and “tolerate” them – at least to the point of staying with them.  They would rather put up with an unsavory situation than pull up stakes.  Many at SGG are fully aware of what Cekada said about Schiavo (and that he was totally wrong), and many are also aware of the brutality and immorality of what went on at SGG’s school; but they stay for the “peripherals”: the pontifical Masses, the processions, and all the rest of the tinsel.  And they keep “hoping against hope” that things will somehow “get better.”  They think in terms of their time there as being “an investment,” and they don’t want to “start all over again.”

But what they fail to understand is that they’re “hoping against hope” when there is no hope – and that their “investment” amounts to throwing good money after bad.  Many of them, too, say to themselves, “Well, the next time they do something like that, we’re leaving.”  But the problem with “the next time” is that it’s like “tomorrow” – it never comes.  The “next time” is NOW.  In fact, it was YESTERDAY.  Dannie and Tony have demonstrated, time after time, that they’re not going to change – at least, not for the better.  How many “next times” must people endure before they open their eyes and see it?

They need to come to the hard realization that the SGG cult-masters are frauds – and that their righteous talk and sanctimony will never pass for righteousness and sanctity.  Dannie and Tony are the epitome of the Pharisee that Christ condemned so many times in His parables.  People must learn to stop listening to what the cult-masters say, but instead watch what they do.  This is a hard lesson, but a necessary one, that they must learn – for their own good.

* After a recent Pistrina article reported that Dannie dishonestly told everyone that he has a “privileged altar” at SGG, one of his culties sent an e-mail message to Pistrina, vehemently denying that he made such a claim.  In fact, she (the correspondent) irately fumed, “Before God I swear it.”  Well, in a subsequent article, Pistrina provided PROOF (from Dannie’s own words) that he claimed as such.  Thus, the woman actually perjured herself for Dannie. 

Now some might protest that she wasn’t aware of Dannie’s claim (and then say that it wasn't “perjury” as such).  But if that’s the case, then she was guilty of calling God down as witness on something that she didn’t know for sure – and that too is a false claim under oath, i.e., she lied – and that’s still perjury.  So, she sinned mortally for her Dannie.  But that’s what people will do when they’re properly brainwashed (and gullible): they’ll LIE for Dannie – even under oath. 

Needless to say, Pistrina never heard from this woman again – but that’s “par for the course”: worms, once they’ve been exposed as liars, just crawl back on their hole and hide, never to be seen or heard from again.

Saturday, November 21, 2015

Paris: a Wake-up Call?

Editor’s Note:  This article is a “special edition” of Lay Pulpit.  Ordinarily, we would not be publishing until next week; but in light of the recent terrorist events in Paris, we thought it timely to say something – and to repeat, at least in part, a message that we’ve said before.  Our “regular” readers will notice that much of this article is excerpted from a previous article (the repeated part is shown in green print).  But, in light of what happened in Paris, that same message needs to be repeated again – especially for any new readers.  Because of that, this article is rather long.  For that, we beg the reader’s indulgence; but we think it essential that it all be said.

It has been a little over a week since the horrific attack in Paris by “Moslem extremists.”  No doubt it has been “condemned” not only by secular leaders and Christian leaders around the world, but also by “moderate Islam” as well.  To this we must say “HORSE DUNG.”  There is NO SUCH THING as “moderate Islam.”  Islam, in and of itself, is RADICAL.  It is a “religion” of HATE, and its goal is the forcible and VIOLENT overthrow of Christianity.  Period.  There are those – including most who condemned these “extremists” -- who will say that these ISIS operatives (or whoever they are) are a “small minority,” and that most Moslems do not support them.  Again, “HORSE DUNG.”  Yes, they may be a small numerical minority, but they seem to have the support – tacit or otherwise – of the majority of their Moslem brethren.  Surely, in a world with literally billions of Moslems, some can use their influence to curb these extremists, but they won’t – and haven’t.  And, in a world of billions of Moslems, why is it Christian Europe’s “responsibility” to take in those Syrian “refugees”?  Why not their Moslem brethren?

Islam not radical?  Islam not a religion of hate?  Islam a religion of peace?  The Koran itself says otherwise, as the following sampling of its “suras” (chapters) will attest:

2:191: And fight the infidels, wherever you find them; and expel them from the place they have turned you out from. 2:193: Fight them until idolatry comes to an end, and the law of Allah prevails.  4:24Also forbidden are married women, unless they are captives of war: such is the decree of Allah.  (What they’re talking about here is who a man can or cannot have sex with; so what they’re doing is ratifying the rape of women captured in a jihad.)  4:24: They give those of these women you have enjoyed the agreed dower.  It will not be faithful if you have agreed to something else by mutual consent, after having settled the dowry.  Allah is certainly all-knowing and all wise.  (What this verse is doing is ratifying prostitution; if a man pays a woman a “dower” or dowry, i.e., a certain quantity of money, he can have sex with her without obligation.) 4:34 (This is talking to a man, one of whose many wives will not have sex with him willingly):  As for women who you feel are averse, talk to them persuasively, then leave them alone in bed without molesting them, then beat them, then go to bed with them when they are willing.  (This ratifies beating your wife if she won’t have sex with you.)  5:33The punishment for those who wage war against Allah and his prophet [Mohammed] is to kill or crucify them, and have a hand on one side and a foot on the other cut off8:12And Allah said to the angel, ‘I am with you; go and strengthen the faithful.  I shall fill the hearts of the infidels with terror, so smite them on their necks and incapacitate them. (i.e., a  call to behead all infidels)  9:29: Fight those among the People of the Book [i.e., Christians] who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth [i.e., Islam], until they pay the jizya [tribute] with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.  9:80Whether you plead forgiveness for them or not, Allah will not forgive them, even though you plead seventy times, for they disbelieve in Allah and his apostle; and Allah does not show transgressors the way. (A loving, forgiving God?)  13:42Sure those who have gone before them did deceive, but Allah is all deceiving, for he has knowledge of what each does. (This is calling God a deceiver and liar, which, of course, implies that Allah’s true identity is Satan.)  23:1The true believers will be successful who are humble in their service who shun all frivolities, who strive for betterment, who guard their sex except from their wives and their women slaves of old [This ratifies concubines].  52:24 (regarding man-boy sex):  And young boys, like pearls within their shells, will go around; and 56:17Boys of never-ending bloom [pubescence] will pass around them cups and decanters; and then 76:19And boys of everlasting youth will go about attending them.  Looking at them, you would think that they were pearls dispersed.   (This is an allusion to the Islamic sponsorship of pedophilia, and of looking on young boys as sex objects.  Most boys in Islamic cultures do not escape childhood without being anally and orally raped, according to speaker.)  55:4: As for your women who have lost hope of menstruation and in case you have doubts, the prescribed period of waiting for them is three months, as also for those who are not menstruating yet. (What this is doing is ratifying the violation of pre-pubescent girls, i.e., pre-puberty girls.)

Allah, then, as is evident from those excerpts (which are just a sampling), is a vengeful, deceiving “God” who justifies (and indeed prescribes) the rape and beating of women, sex with minors, prostitution, wanton slaughter (usually by beheading) of “infidels” (including women and children), and even pedophilia.  Is this the kind of God that IS God?  NO.  The speaker in the video contends that “Allah” is actually Satan; and she is probably right -- for NO God would condone such things and still BE God. 

Islam, both in word and in practice, is EVIL.  The modern, media-orchestrated notion of Islam as “tolerant” is a total MYTH.  Islam never was tolerant – and never will be.  The irony of it all is that these media that portray the Moslems as “tolerant” are, by and large, Zionist controlled – and the Zionists and Moslem Arabs are portrayed as archenemies.  But the truth is, this is only cosmetic: they’re both “on the same team.”  They’re both belligerently vindictive; they’re both not about forgiveness, but about “eye-for-an-eye” retaliation, retribution -- about vengeance; and they’re both out to destroy Christianity, except that the Moslems do it with “swords” (and very clumsily) -- while the Zionists do it with “cash registers” and “Hollywood”  (but much more subtly).

The notion of Moslem “benevolence” is quickly dispelled when sees what they really practice: women are genitally mutilated with the express purpose of maximizing the man’s sexual pleasure -- and the woman’s pain and suffering.  A man can be unfaithful, can fornicate at will, can have limitless “wives,” and can divorce a woman on any pretext – with total impunity.  Yet when a woman does the same, she is beheaded or stoned to death.  A man can wear as much (or as little) as he wants; but a woman, to be a “true” Moslem, must be covered from head to toe -- with a mask over her face.  Young, pre-puberty Moslem girls are routinely “sold” to seedy, middle-aged men as “wives” (that is, to be sex slaves for middle-aged pedophilic perverts).  Indeed, the selling of young girls as sex slaves is big business throughout the Islamic world – an embarrassing, damning reality.

Our media have routinely claimed that in the past, the Moslems came as benevolent, tolerant conquerors, and that Christian conquerors were, in contrast, butchers -- when in fact the opposite was true.  When Moslems conquered Christian lands, they wantonly butchered the “infidels” (as the Koran and “Allah” commanded); and the women were wantonly raped and/or sold as slaves into harems – practices that routinely go on to this day: just recently, reports of whole villages – including women and children -- being slaughtered by Islamic militants (usually by beheading) have been confirmed by independent sources.  And the selling of young girls as sex slaves has already been noted -- a widely recognized (and accepted) practice in Moslem countries throughout the world. 

It is interesting to note, too, what the Islamic notion of Heaven is: in the Koran’s own words, it is a “garden of earthly delights” – a sensual Valhalla where each man is attended to (and sexually satisfied) by “a hundred virgins.”  “Heaven,” then, is little more than an eternal sex orgy, where men are in a never-ending state of hormonal ecstasy – while women are servile non-entities, whose only function there is to provide that ecstasy. Wow!  Any woman who subscribes to that sort of nonsense must be either an IDIOT or (literally) a damned fool  -- and so must any man: to believe that something as accidental as one’s gender rewards the one with eternal bliss while condemning the other to nameless, mindless servitude), is a  notion that is utterly absurd to any rational being.

It is also interesting to note that in the aforementioned YouTube video about Islam, the speaker was a woman – and probably not Catholic at that.  (Actually, she appeared in two videos: the first video dealt with her reply to comments made by U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham (R, South Carolina) on a nationally televised show (Face the Nation), where he proposed restricting Americans from burning the Koran (but said nothing, of course, about Moslems burning our flag and our Bible).  Both videos are excellent, and the woman is very articulate – and brave.  To the tinhorn potentates of Traddieland (such as Daniel Dolan and Anthony Cekada), she probably comes across as a “whining woman” – probably with a “feminist agenda.”  And, being the puritanical prudes that they (and their cultlings) are, they probably “ding” her as well for her “language” (she calls Allah a “sonofabitch” several times during the video, and she uses some “anatomical” metaphors).

As we stated in the original article from which the foregoing was taken (the portion in green print), good men (i.e., priests) must take the lead in effecting the final triumph of Christianity.  But we also noted that, although Islam is evil, there are many Moslems who are good, decent people who abhor what happened in Paris.  However, that’s not enough.  In the end, they must REJECT Islam in toto because, as the Koran’s own words proclaim, it prescribes things that are openly immoral and evil.  It is a FALSE creed.  The Moslems who lead “good, decent lives” are doing so because they are practicing what Christianity teaches, not what Islam teaches.  They are, in practice, leading Christian lives – so why not then take the next logical step, and become Christian?

Peace in this world will not come about by us getting rid of “bad” Moslems, and finding accommodation with “good” Moslems – because Islam itself is EVIL.  How can a “religion” whose Koran says what it does be anything but that?  Moslems must become Christian.  But so must “Christian Europe.”  Europe, unfortunately, is only nominally Christian, but not Christian in fact.  It was sadly ironic, after the Paris attacks, how everyone was “showing their support for France”: the Brits even sang the Marseillaise  (France’s national anthem) – a Godless song that celebrated a Godless, anti-Christian revolution.

Appealing to “national pride,” or showing “international solidarity” isn’t going to stop any evil, nor is crushing “extremist Islam” by military force going to do it.  That will only “treat the symptom,” and temporarily subdue a seething resentment that will surely surface again (just as World War I’s Versailles Treaty subdued a resentment, only to see it come back again – with terrible results). Permanent peace will only happen when the “cause” not the symptom -- is treated, i.e., when Europe wakes up and realizes that getting back to their Christian roots – not “solidarity” -- is what really counts.

The present course that Europe is on is SUICIDE: letting in millions of Moslem “refugees,” when they KNOW that many of them will inevitably be terrorists – that this is a Trojan Horse that could DESTROY Western Christian civilization.  It is an INSANE policy that the vast majority of Europe’s people reject but their governments approve.  There have been many reports – especially on “social media” – of what the so-called “refugees” are really about (see attached video); but the mainstream media are strangely SILENT.  Why?  Because, again, they are Zionist controlled.  The Zionists do not WANT peace in the Middle East.  (They have demonstrated that time and again: every time there has been an Israeli-Arab "peace initiative," it has been the Israelis who have "torpedoed" it.)*

Moslems need to understand this.  They need to realize that we, like they, are just pawns in the Zionist chess game – and that both they and we are losers in that game.**  But what they must also realize, in the end, is that their “religion” – Islam – is evil.  They need to ask themselves this: How can a creed that calls itself “benevolent” and “peaceful” not only condone but prescribe -- right there in writing in its “holy book” -– the killing of its enemies, and the raping of their women?  How can a deceitful and vengeful God be a good God?    How can a creed that warrants prostitution and pedophilia be the “true” religion? The answer, of course, is that it cannot.  Only Christianity preaches a message of charity and forgiveness – of “doing unto others as you would have them do unto you.”  And only Catholic Christianity gets that message right.***  Again, today’s Moslems must come to embrace the Christian principles that many of them are now practicing.  Ultimately, they must reject Islam.

But given the present “climate” – the Godless, amoral hedonism of the West, and the blind fanaticism of the ISIS terrorists -- that’s not likely to happen any time soon (nor is it realistic to expect that “moderate” Moslems will just “fold up their tent” and become Christian overnight).****  And it will, we fear, take something much more cataclysmic than the “Paris attacks” to effect that kind of change.  The good news is that it will happen, because Our Lord promised us that He will be with us “all days, even unto the consummation of the world” and that He will “put enmities between thee [Satan] and the woman [Mary], and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” 

These indeed are consoling words, but just what exactly do they mean?  How will they “play out”?  What we think (and hope) that they mean is that Islam, as well as all other false creeds, will ultimately fall; and Christ’s Church will triumph.  As things stand now, this is a hard scene to envisage.  Will it come by degrees, or will it take a cataclysmic event to put things to right?  There are many speculations and predictions on what will happen, and when.  But whichever way it happens, all pretty much agree that it is not likely to happen painlessly.

* Of course, "Israel" came into being back in 1948 by dispossessing the Palestinians of their own land, and by doing so with our "blessing" -- and help.  So, it's no wonder why they hate us -- but that's a subject for a whole other article.

** One thing for sure: we’ll never get the “straight scoop” from the mainstream media -- just as we never got it from them about all the chaos the “refugees” are creating (again, see video) – for reasons already noted.  It is entirely possible, for instance, that these “ISIS” people are funded (and orchestrated) by Zionist agents.  That might sound absurd; but remember, they control the mainstream media -- and where is all our news coverage of the recent events in Paris coming from?

Alternately, ISIS might be funded by wealthy Moslems.  The problem is, we just don’t know, because what we “hear,” again, goes through the mainstream media “filter.” We don’t have a crystal ball, so we can only speculate.  But one thing we can ask ourselves is this: who would benefit from us and the Moslems going head-to-head in combat?  (Hint: it won’t be either of us.)  So, if the rest of the Moslem world is tacitly supporting ISIS, they would do well to reconsider: such a policy is not in their best interest – short-term or long-term.

*** Protestantism, for a multitude of reasons, doesn’t “get it right.”  For one thing, it preaches “fides sola”: that faith alone is all that is required for salvation – that, regardless of one’s deeds (or misdeeds), he is “saved” as long as he “accepts Christ.”  It’s kind of odd, isn’t it: Islam prescribes that one must rape, pillage, steal, lie, and murder in order to be “saved,” while the Protestantism preaches that it isn’t necessary to do anything at all to be saved – except to “accept Jesus.”  So, in the one case, one is saved, so to speak, by “overdoing it,” and in the other by “under-doing it.”  It is only Catholicism that strikes the right balance: that we must be responsible for our actions (and that those actions must be just and charitable), and that it takes both faith and good works to gain salvation.  Catholicism offers the only rational alternative for salvation.  The other two, Protestantism and Islam, will -- if “put under a microscope” -- be found to be philosophically, logically, and morally absurd.

**** We wonder, too, just how “moderate” the “moderate Moslems” really are.  As we stated in this article’s opening remarks, there seems to be a general apathy on their part, when they see all this terrorist activity going on, to do much about it.  While they publicly deplore it, are they secretly applauding or encouraging it?  One thing for sure: the rest of the Moslem world (the Saudis, for instance) doesn’t seem to be going out of its way to stop this terrorism (nor, as we also noted before, are they volunteering to take in any of their Moslem brethren as “refugees”).  Do they not have any influence where any of this is concerned?  What are their real intentions? Again, we just don’t know.  

Another thing: “moderate” Moslems say that these terrorists “don’t represent Islam.”  They say that it a “peace-loving religion.”  That isn’t quite true: in many Moslem countries, non-Moslems are persecuted, and, in many cases, not allowed to practice their religion at all –  in Saudi Arabia, for example.  Non-Moslem worship is forbidden there; and one cannot wear (or even bring in) a religious object to that country -- yet they demand “freedom of worship” when they enter Western countries.  (Ironically, under Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Christians were entirely free to worship, as they are under Assad in Syria.  Kind of makes one wonder why we toppled the one, and are trying to do the same to the other, doesn’t it?)

Another thing: it is not only ISIS or Al Qaida who are troublemakers.  In many countries where Moslems are in a pluralistic society, they engage in terrorist activity – in several African countries and in the Philippines, for instance.  In some cases, they even cause problems for other countries (the Pakistani terrorist activity in India, for instance).  It is never a case of Christians causing trouble in Moslem countries; it’s always the other way around. Wherever Islam is, it is usually intolerant and belligerent.  They want “peaceful coexistence” and “tolerance” from others; but in many “moderate” Moslem countries, they don’t reciprocate.

Lastly, we must note that, in the main, Moslems aren’t even tolerant within their own circle.  Theirs is a double standard world, where men can do anything they want: fornicate, be unfaithful to their wives, even rape and murder -- with complete impunity -- while women get stoned to death for doing the same.  In the Koran’s own written word, Islam is not moderate at all; and theologically and morally, its words just don’t “add up.”  Granted, there are many Moslems who do not condone (or practice) such “double-standard” precepts.  Many of them lead decent, perhaps even exemplary, lives; but they are doing so because they are practicing what Christianity – not Islam – teaches.

Saturday, November 14, 2015

Lip Service

Picture this scene: Moslem hordes, bursting into Christian homes, and trying to force their children to renounce their faith.  If the children do not, they are beheaded -- right there in front of their parents.  Is this a tale excerpted from Lives of the Saints, or is it some narrative plucked from another part of the Church’s past?  No, it’s happening right now, even as we speak, over in the Middle East.  The “Moslem hordes,” in this case, are ISIS operatives.  And who are their victims?  It turns out that, in the main, they are the children of Baptist missionaries over there – you know, those wretched “Samaritans,” looked down upon by traddies, and “for whom there is no salvation.”  In the towns where ISIS takes over, they systematically go from house to house, asking the children to “renounce Jesus.”  A Baptist spokesman reports that, to a child, every one of them chose beheading rather than do that.

The ISIS fighters singled out the children, not the parents – undoubtedly to maximize the grief on both sides.  And it must be remembered that beheading, “Moslem style,” involves not a mercifully quick stroke with a large sword, but a slow, ritualistic severing of the head from the body (by the back-and-forth slicing motion of a knife), while some deranged “imam” nearby rattles off some satanic Moslem “prayers.”  This gives the victim plenty of time to “ponder” his position -- while his head is slowly being parted from his body.  And, to repeat, it was done in front of the parents in order to maximize and prolong their anguish.

Was this something that was reported in Dannie Dolan’s sermon on the great feast of Christ the King?  Or was it in his Bishop’s Corner in that Sunday’s church bulletin?  No, it wasn’t.  In his sermon, Dannie was too busy doing his usual “Bergoglio bashing,” and ranting against “modernism.”  And his Bishop’s Corner?  That was full of his usual sanctimonious pap: our perfect action and reaction to the revolution against morality which just concluded in Rome”; and how about this for meaningless drivel: “Here, in the shadow of the tabernacle we will dwell in safety”; or this: “Here, at the Communion Rail, marriages will find their strength, morality will triumph over moral relativism, and our innocent children will persevere in virtue”; and finally, that perennial favorite, “Come, Let us adore!”

And, of course (since the feast of Christ the King includes Forty Hours Devotion), Dannie exhorted his Gerties to “Make a visit this afternoon. Come back for closing service this evening.”  Then he added, Great observances such as this demand much preparation and cooperation for the ceremonies and music and altars and refreshments.”  [Oh, how Dannie loves his “show”!]  Now there’s nothing wrong with any of this per se: adoring our Lord is, after all, one of the most edifying things we can do.  But you and I both know that, with Dannie, it’s not about glorifying God; it’s about aggrandizing Dannie; it’s about “the show.”

What we’d like to know is this: Dannie, where was your “triumph over moral relativism” when the school principal’s boys were watching those porn and animal torture flicks on the school computer (and you called it “boys will be boys’)?  And when they tried to get younger students to watch them too, how did that help “our innocent children… persevere in virtue”?  [Perhaps they were watching them “in the shadow of the tabernacle” where they could “dwell in safety”?]  Was this their “perfect action and reaction to the revolution against morality which just concluded in Rome”?  Enlighten us, Dannie, if you will!

But Dannie can’t enlighten us, can he?  Double-standard Dan only reports others’ sins, not his own.  If he had heard about those Baptist missionaries and their children, he probably would have berated them, just as he did with that Kentucky woman who spoke out against homosexual “marriage.”  After all, in the pecking order of “unworthy scum,” Baptists are “way down there,” even below the Novus Ordo.  To Traddieland’s chief Pharisee, these people are worse than Samaritans. But would Dannie have had the same faith and courage as these folks?  We think not.  Dannie likes to “talk brave” here, where he can “dwell in safety”; but we don’t see him going on any “apostolates” to Iraq or Syria any time soon.

Dannie is too busy condemning people for violating his “articles of faith.”  It was downright amusing to see how eagerly he reported one of his “brave” culties (who attends his Milwaukee cult center) dressing down an SSPX bishop for saying an una cum Mass: “’Why do you put the name of a Satan-worshipping Free Mason in the Canon of the Mass?’ she politely inquired. The bishop only gave her one of those insipid smiles that bishops are known for.”  Our italics.]  We wonder if she (or Dannie) would admonish a scimitar-wielding ISIS operative in the same way.  Again, we think not.  (But we know what Dannie means when he talks about “one of those insipid smiles that bishops are known for.” Yeah, Dannie, we know that “smile” well -- except that in this case, it’s a mousy snicker.)

But that’s what happens when the cult mentality takes over.  Dannie, Tony, and the fire-breathing nitwit down in Florida have their followers believing that “”there’s no salvation outside the cult center”; and they have dreamed up all sorts of “requirements” for one to be “Catholic.”  The result is that they have split Catholics into warring factions, all at one another’s throats – even pitting family members against one another.  And for good reason: the cult masters do not WANT unity, because they don’t want people to be able to go to just any Catholic church -- they want them only at their church.  Unity is “bad for business.” 

Unfortunately, this mentality pervades much of Traddieland: each warring faction imposes its own set of pet “rules” to keep its followers within its enclave (and to disqualify everyone else).  And while they’re bickering over these petty (and irresolvable) issues, others are taking the lead in what really matters – those Baptist missionaries, for example.  While they are literally dying for their faith, Dannie only talks about it (usually with a Lives of the Saints anecdote from the distant past).  They gave their lives; Dannie gives lip service.  And sometimes, it’s not even that: when that Kentucky woman stood up for marriage, Dannie could only criticize her.  And while a Novus Ordo priest was fighting for Terri Schiavo’s life, Dannie and Tony could only offer reasons why her husband was justified in having her starved and dehydrated to death (while they were feeding their faces at their favorite restaurants).

What Traddieland needs is NOT men like these two cowardly, self-seeking maggots, but men who will UNITE Catholics (instead of inventing reasons to divide them).  “Sedevacantism” is NOT a criterion for determining if someone is “Catholic,” nor is it a reason to bar one from the sacraments – and praying for a bad pope does not make a Mass invalid (or illicit).  Men like Dannie, Tony, and Big Don have absolutely NO POWER (or right) to decree such things as “prerequisites” for being “Catholic.” Regardless of what people’s beliefs are on such issues, they are Catholic – and no self-appointed “theologians” can decree otherwise.  These things are not articles of faith; they are private opinions that ecclesiastical tinhorns like Dannie, Tony, and Bombastic Don haven’t the juridical authority to impose on anyone. Dannie, Tony, and Big Don, in short, are FRAUDS.

So, what can one do?  How can one unite with fellow Catholics?  First, start by listening to (and supporting) priests who are saying and doing the right things.  This article’s opening remarks about those Baptist martyrs, for instance: they were excerpted from a sermon given recently by a priest who is “saying and doing the right things.”  (Click here for the full sermon.)  In it, you’ll find none of Dannie’s sanctimonious horse dung or Tony’s fallacious tedium, or the maniacal ravings of Brooksville’s swampland sadist® – only the simple truth, intelligently articulated in a straightforward, no-nonsense manner: straight talk about real problems in a real world.  There’s also none of Dannie’s other drivel: banal banter about the weather and/or the flora and fauna of the region, or brainless chatter about the grisly habits of one’s pet cats.  Note also that there are no “funding requests” for “apostolates” to faraway lands (to perform unneeded confirmations), or any heavy-handed hints about paying for “high heating bills” or “leaky roofs” (not to mention, raccoon infestations -- for a facility that, by the way, is less than twenty years old, but already falling apart). 

Concurrent with finding (and supporting) worthy priests, concerned Catholics must rid themselves of illegitimate parasites like Dannie, Tony, and Big Don, and then strive to find common ground with other Catholics.  They must, again, UNITE under worthy men; and they must learn to put their differences aside on issues that are not defined dogma (such as sedevacantism), and concentrate on the ones that are.  One of the four marks of the true Church is Unity.  And until “traditional Catholicism” starts working towards uniting – and under worthy men -- it cannot hope to become Catholic.  Perhaps it is an elusive goal, but it is the only one with any chance of success.  The path that Traddieland is now on can only lead to failure.