Saturday, March 19, 2016

What Dannie’s Priorities Are – and Aren’t

Swiss mathematician Charles E. Guye once calculated the odds of one protein being formed “by chance” (as evolutionists claim), assuming an unlimited amount of matter being available to “collide.”  The odds are 100160 (100 multiplied by itself 160 times) to one against.  To put that into perspective, the number of electrons (not atoms) in the known universe is 10130 (10, not 100, multiplied by itself 130, not 160, times).  The latter number is infinitesimally smaller than the former – but both are unimaginably large.  In short, the chances of that simple protein being formed are mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.  One must also bear in mind that we’re talking about a simple protein, not even a simple one-celled organism, or something as complex as the human brain – not to mention, a whole human being (or the incredible variety of plant and animal life that exists on earth).  And all of this assumes, of course, that the unlimited amount of matter that we mentioned (not to mention, our vast and seemingly limitless universe) was just “there” – appearing “out of nothing,” as it were.

For any number of reasons, the doctrine of evolution is pure myth.  We use the word “doctrine” advisedly, for evolution is  not a science but a religion.  It is a belief system that makes claims that are preposterous, and asks its followers to accept things that are utterly impossible – mathematically, geologically, or otherwise – a belief system that violates every known scientific precept.  But why are we talking here about evolution instead of “traditional Catholicism”?  The reason is a simple one, but a fundamental one: evolution undermines the very foundations of religion itself.  As a noted British author once said, “Every attack on the Christian faith made today has, as its basis, the doctrine of evolution” (Newman Watts, author of Britain Without God). 

If evolution is true, then there is no such thing as morality, good and evil – no such thing as God.  And with God out of the equation – if we are nothing more than “fancied up stardust” -- concepts such as “good, “evil,” and being accountable for one’s actions are totally meaningless.  And if we are no more than distant cousins to a cockroach, then aborting “unwanted” babies is basically no different than stepping on that cockroach, or swatting an annoying fly.  And if a person has outlived his “usefulness,” why keep him around?  Dispose of him! So, if evolution is “for real,” then that gives those “at the top of the chain” a blank check to weed out those “at the bottom of the chain – to do whatever it takes to ensure “the survival of the fittest,” etc., etc. etc.

And, unfortunately, evolution is widely accepted by many, in whole or in part, because it is taught as “fact” in just about every school in the land – even in “Catholic” schools.  And in all the mainstream media too – especially television -- it is also presented as accomplished fact, repeated over and over again until people start to believe it.  It is no wonder that a large percentage of our youth, inundated with its message from all sides, is becoming agnostic -- or atheistic.  These evolutionary “seeds of doubt” that are being sowed are eating away at all our fundamental beliefs, like a cancer. 

For that reason, evolution must be refuted, and its insidious errors exposed.  This process must start in our schools, with our children being taught – even at an early age -- about its gross errors and false assumptions.  It must become an integral part of our schools’ religious training curriculum; and a good text to include in that curriculum is one from which this article’s figures were taken: The Death of Evolution, by Australian author Wallace Johnson. It is a particularly good book for “beginners,” for it is easy to understand; plus, it references many other sources that one can read to find out more.

Now one would think that “traditional” Catholic schools would have long since taken the lead in this sort of thing.  Well, think again.  SGG’s school, for instance, hasn’t.  Some years back, a parishioner brought to Daniel Dolan’s attention (and presented to him) the very book just mentioned.  Did Dannie ever mention it (or any of its contents) in any of his sermons?  No.  Did he get with his school principal to have it (or anything like it) taught in SGG’s school – or included as a volume in the school library?*  Again, NO.  Dannie and Tony were too busy instructing the students in such “relevant" issues as,  why it's a “mortal sin” to attend an una cum Mass, to wear a headband in church, or to ride a roller-coaster (while at the same time dismissing such things as watching porn on the school computer as “boys will be boys”).

To a kid whose mind is constantly being bombarded with all the evolutionary propaganda in the media – and who then witnesses all the obvious moral inconsistencies in the cult center – what does ANYTHING matter?  Why should he care about “pontifical” High Masses or candlelight processions – or what Masses are valid or not – when his pastor thinks that watching porn is “boys will be boys”?  The hypocrisy of it all must be positively overwhelming for him.  Perhaps that is why so many young people have left SGG and/or lost their Faith.  Besides, if we are, again, nothing more than hopped up “stardust” or distant cousins to a cockroach, what relevancy do concepts like “morality” and “ethics” have anyway?

Ironically, it is the Protestants who more and more are taking the lead on issues such as Evolution – just as they are in speaking out against Islam.**  It is they who are taking the lead in combating it -- with cogent, intelligent arguments (and including it as an integral part of their children’s formal religious training) -- while the SGG and Brooksville cult centers are preoccupied with such “weighty” issues as “dress codes” and bans on “body-piercings.”  They’re not so much concerned with Evolution as they are with themselves.  And that’s because here’s no money in “Evolution”: there’s more money in “poor souls” envelopes (to put on Dannie’s “privileged” altar -- that really isn’t) – so why bother with Evolution?

SGG’s parishioners – especially those with children – need to wake up to the fact that the cult-masters’ agenda is a self-serving one – and that there’s more to Catholicism than letter-perfect rite and rubrics.  Real Catholicism does not divide people by arguing over irresolvable theological and doctrinal issues (by renegade know-nothings who haven’t the capability, the credentials, or the authority to do so -- yet who deny the sacraments to those who don’t adhere to their invented precepts). Real Catholicism is about unity, not division; and it is about real morality that binds everyone, not about selectively enforced puritanism.*** 

SGG’s parishioners need to come to the realization that the cult-masters are nothing more than manipulative, money-grubbing predators who are hurting them and their children, both spiritually and materially.  And actually, many of them have come to that realization, and have stated that they’re just waiting for the “right moment” to leave.  But, as we’ve already said before, that “right moment” is NOW – especially for those parishioners with children.  If they tarry too long, their kids, like so many of their contemporaries who have gone before them, will see through the hypocrisy – and some will become disenchanted (as so many already have), and lose their Faith.

That is something for their parents to think about.  As parents, they’re responsible not just for their own spiritual well-being, but again, for their children’s.  They cannot, for instance, just take care of their own souls, while ignoring what happens to their children (or what path they take).  That is a responsibility that they cannot abdicate.  For those whose children have grown up and gone astray, it is perhaps too late.  But for those with children still there at SGG, they need to come to the realization that Dannie’s priorities are not their (or their children’s) priorities – then do something about it, while there is still time to do so.  If they continue to expose their children to the superficial nonsense that passes for “religion” at SGG, those kids too will fall by the wayside.  Then will those parents share -- equally with Dannie and Tony -- accountability for their children’s (and their own) spiritual fate. 


* SGG’s school library did, however, include Brideshead Revisited, a novel (by British author Evelyn Waugh) that dealt with several immoral themes – including adultery and homosexuality.  Dannie and Tony had no problem stocking this book (and Tony even had words of praise for it in one of his sermons).

** One of our previous articles reported on a woman (who was Protestant) who made two videos (which are linked in the article) against Islam.  That is not to say, however, that there aren’t any traditional clergy speaking out against Islam as well.  There are – but not at the SGG cult center.

*** The puritanical nonsense that passes for “morality” is legendary at the cult centers:  Where else but SGG could a pastor define watching porn on the school computer as “boys will be boys,” yet have his “priests” tell the school kids that wearing a sport headband in church or riding a roller-coaster is a mortal sin?  And where else but the Brooksville puppy mill would a seminary prefect claim that all the abortions ever performed are not as displeasing to God as ONEmotu” Mass?  At both the SGG and Brooksville cult centers, this kind of lunacy is the order of the day.

Saturday, March 5, 2016

Tinhorn Tony Self-Destructs Again

A recent Pistrina article, Fatal Vision, noted, amongst other things, Erroneous Antonius Cekada’s ill-fated foray into cyber stardom: a YouTube video about sedevacantism.  Tony’s video was in response to Messrs. Salza and Siscoe’s book, True or False Pope.  Cekada’s video, in turn, drew a response from the conservative publication The Remnant.  In their response, The Remnant noted that Tony attacked not only Salza and Siscoe (and their book, even though he had not yet read it!), but a host of other people as well (click here for The Remnant’s response) -- accusing them of doing what they do (or holding the views they do) for mercenary reasons.  Tony’s video was a textbook example, as The Remnant so rightly put it, of “ad hominem attacks and oversimplifications.”

Among those whom Tony attacked were the SSPX’s Bishop Fellay, the late Father Nicholas Gruner, and even Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Tony either insinuating or stating outright that they held their positions for “money” reasons.  Of course, Tony also slights Salza and Siscoe’s credentials, pointing that they are lawyers, not theologians.  Well, they may not be theologians, but their credentials are real.  Tony is neither a theologian nor a canonical “expert” (both of which he pretends to be) – and he possesses no degrees in either of those fields.  Salza and Siscoe’s credentials, on the other hand, are real, and from accredited institutions.

Tony’s accusing Fellay, Gruner, and Lefebvre for holding their views for “money” reasons is nothing new, by the way.  That’s an old tactic of his, dating back at least to his attack on the late Abbot Leonard Giardina – in a Quidlibet article in 2011 -- when he accused him of being “non-committal” for exactly the same reasons: 
Father’s caginess on the pope question,” Tony began, “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 [our boldface] 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.”
The fact that Tony wrote the foregoing about Abbot Giardina shortly after the abbot died (when he therefore couldn’t respond) makes Tony’s unsolicited (and pointless) vilification all the more uncharitable -- and cowardly.  It’s curious, too, that Tony used the word “shtick” – because that exactly describes Tony himself.  His writing style has always been that way: trite, smug, condescending, and sarcastic -- unscholarly in tone as well as in fact.  And, as always, Tony ignores a person’s argument, but attacks the person instead: classic “ad hominem.  (But this is just one of the many ways in which Dannie and Tony have always tried to make themselves look good by making others look bad.*)  It’s also the height of hypocrisy that Tony accuses the abbot of being mercenary – because, again, that exactly describes Tony himself (and, for that matter, Dannie too).

At one time, the deceptive duo was able to get away with this sort of nonsense, because, for the most part, their audience was a captive and/or gullible one.  But in recent years, that has been changing.  The beginning of that transformation process was probably when Cekada made his depraved comments about Schiavo.  Since then, just about everything he has written has been exposed (especially by Pistrina) as the know-nothing drivel that it is.  Tony’s reputation as a “scholar” is now “in the toilet.”  And just recently, after the double fiasco of SGG’s mistake-riddled “Ordo 2016” and its “All Saints Calendar” (that contains, not saints, but grainy pictures of the cult center), SGG’s “reputation” has all but evaporated.

And now, the coup de grĂ¢ce: Tony, in his ineffable non-wisdom (and arrogance), decided to pick a fight with Messrs. Salza and Siscoe (and their book, True or False Pope?), and to make a YouTube video about it.  As Pistrina noted, this has attracted a yet even wider audience (including The Remnant) – people with real intelligence and real credentials -- who are tearing Tinhorn Tony to shreds.  Plus, as Pistrina also noted, Donald Sanborn has now been sucked into the maelstrom:  a 2009 interview (between him and Stephen Heiner) has come to light; and it has been thoroughly picked apart, this time again by Messrs. Salza and Siscoe (see Pistrina article, Edge of Doom, and its interview link).  And, as Pistrina rightly concluded, both Tony and Donnie are now the laughing stock of Trad Nation.

The bottom line of all this new exposure is that the SGG/Brooksville parasites are no longer hidden (and protected) from world view.  They’re now under the spotlight of public scrutiny, and they are being exposed for the shams that they are.  And, actually, even the cult-masters’ followers are starting to take notice.  They are no longer automatically swallowing everything the cult-masters say or do.  On the contrary, their one-time blind obedience has given way to questioning and to skepticism; and that skepticism is fast morphing into discontent – especially with respect to funding mid-winter junkets to sunny climes, paying for the cult-masters’ unneeded new toys, and being bombarded with incessant pleas for money to fix the prematurely crumbling cult center.**  In short, what Dannie and Tony could count on before, they can no longer count on now. 

So, by his preemptive attack on Messrs. Salza and Siscoe, Tony -- to repeat -- has only managed to draw wider attention not only to himself but to Big Don as well, thereby awakening opposition in even more people, and thus further swelling the ranks of those who are finding the cult-masters out for the humbugs that they are.  We thank him, then, for that masterful bit of self-destruction.  That, coupled with SGG’s other recent fiascos, should at long last cement the cult-masters’ reputations as frauds – and amateur frauds at that.  And if they continue to open their mouths, they will only make things worse for themselves.  And count on them to do just that – because they never learn from their mistakes.  We look forward to that process continuing, because it will hasten their demise – and, at long last, rid the world of these parasites.

* Playing the “blame game” is one of Dannie’s favorite ploys, such as, his blaming the local power utility (Duke Energy) for SGG’s “high heating bills” -- or blaming the local community authorities for imposing “unfair” building codes on SGG).  His latest bit of mud-slinging was his insinuation – in his Feb. 14 Bishop’s(?) Corner -- that some local SSPX parishioners do not hold the “traditional” fast and abstinence.  In it, he stated, On Friday of course we abstain.  How odd (I really can’t get over it!) that our Kentucky cousins are now eating hamburgers on Friday as their one solitary gesture of solidarity with the Novus Ordo Pope. Imagine it! Friday abstinence is no more for them. Their parents and grandparents, what must they be thinking?”  (What they’re thinking, Dannie, is how much of a HYPOCRITE you are to say what you did – you, who pigged out on “copious quantities of meat” while you were spending Lent in warm, sunny Mexico a few years ago!)

The “Kentucky cousins” to whom Dannie was referring, by the way, are those SGG’s former parishioners who left after the school scandals of 2009 (and even before that), who formed an SSPX congregation in northern Kentucky.  Dannie implies that -- since the SSPX is in communion with Rome (and therefore not bound by “traditional” fast and abstinence rules) – these people aren’t following those rules.  But many SSPX Catholics (and others) DO follow the traditional rules, even though technically they’re not bound to do so – and we’d venture to say that many (if not most) of those “Kentucky cousins” do so as well.

The truth is, it was Dannie who didn’t fast and abstain (when he was in Mexico two years ago).  It was HE who used a “technicality” (that Latin America is not bound by those rules) to excuse himself from those rules at the time – perhaps “legal,” but certainly not in the spirit of Lent.  Dannie has no problem with taking advantage of a technicality, yet has a problem with those “Kentucky cousins” doing the same.  At any rate, we’re sure that many of those SSPX folks do NOT take advantage of their “technicality,” as Dannie did.  And whether they do or not, what business is that of his?  At the very least, it was grossly uncharitable of Dirt-bag Dan to mention what he did.  Why did he feel the need to sling mud at his former parishioners?  What did he hope to gain by it?

** Speaking of “travel junkets,” we notice that Dannie was off to warm, sunny Mexico again this Lent: I’m in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico and El Paso, Texas today, administering Confirmation to Fr. Mardones’ two congregations in a quick visit.”  It seems that Dannie just can’t get through Lent without heading “down south”!  And, since when, we must ask, are confirmations done during Lent?  Couldn’t Dannie have picked a more “traditional” time to do it?  Why now, Dannie?  (And how much did your “quick visit” cost?)