Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC  (Read 22830 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
« Reply #240 on: January 28, 2022, 04:17:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I agree with
    but you may very well be incorrect abouthttps://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2016/10/13/what-is-the-old-catholic-church/
    too squishy for me....  

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #241 on: January 28, 2022, 04:19:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Tell you what... let's assume for a moment that he is a catholic priest:
    Does it mean that he can have a Buddhist shrine at home?
    Does it mean it is okay that he wants to be alone with altar kids without even properly identifying himself?
    Does it mean it is okay to have someone in a position of authority with these suspicions be right next to the school kids without proper identification?

    There is a reason why there is a thread discussing weirdness from this man claiming to be a priest.
    right.

    his squishy and questionable background, combined with his Buddhist home altar, Buddhist junk shop, and what you posted above is enough for me to declare "no way!".


    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #242 on: January 28, 2022, 04:30:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The more this gets unraveled the worse it gets... if Wiest is part of the cult you mention and the school board is fine with that then I know I could never return to OLHC.
    School board should demand that he presents a driver's license
    , no excuses. A good priest would want people to know and a good priest would even lose sleep over the parish having suspicions and asking for ordination and identification details. Wiest on the other hand, seems to take this lightly.
    Evidently the school board asked him and he said he lost it.
    To the school board, that was the end of the story.


    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #243 on: January 28, 2022, 04:35:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Tell you what... let's assume for a moment that he is a catholic priest:
    Does it mean that he can have a Buddhist shrine at home?
    Does it mean it is okay that he wants to be alone with altar kids without even properly identifying himself?
    Does it mean it is okay to have someone in a position of authority with these suspicions be right next to the school kids without proper identification?

    There is a reason why there is a thread discussing weirdness from this man claiming to be a priest.
    That has zero to do with validity. Do you understand the distinction? A man may indeed be downright evil but still confer valid sacraments. I have not seen anyone here, including me, claim that he is a good priest or that he should not be investigated, or that anyone should receive sacraments from him.
    If he is a priest, he should be addressed as Father, not to honor him but to honor HIM.
    If he is a priest, he would be an option in an emergency situation. If I were near death and my choices were no priest or valid but weird priest guess what? I would choose the weirdo.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #244 on: January 28, 2022, 04:36:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Interesting.
    from your link:So, however weird it is, Wiest might actually be validly ordained.
    Wiest is obviously not a priest.

    Do you buy into the following? (from the link)

    "Jesus personally ordained Abbatetto the priesthood and God told Abbate that he was born on Mars. After he died at age seven, he went to heaven. However, he only stayed there briefly as God wanted him to save humanity from perdition. Therefore, he was transported to earth and reborn in a family in Isnello." (Reincarnation?)

    Did you miss this part?

    Abbate “ordained” Schweikert and after Abbate died, "Archbishop" Schweikert was enthroned in 1968 as the Celestial Messenger’s successor.

    Schweikert “ordained” Rematt and in 1988 Schweikert died and was succeeded by "Archbishop" Rematt.

    None of them were valid: not Abbate, not Schweikert, not Rematt and not Wiest.


    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #245 on: January 28, 2022, 04:37:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It was a tough split for OLHC and Fr Starbuck. A lot of people with their emotions running high, perhaps said and did things they have since regretted. Wounds were very raw after losing Fr Perez, and so unexpectedly. Deaths of loved ones are always tough on families, and parish families also.
    Would it be too soon to say that Fr Starbuck is now doing quite well under the circuмstances? He is well loved, has much support from laity, to the point of needing three Masses to serve them all!
    The people lost one priest, but God didn’t send them away empty handed.

    Perhaps I’m already used to the catacombs that it already seems so simple to me for a priest to set up just about anywhere for a Mass.
    I had the joy once of having Mass said in my own living room at home years ago. What a gift..that ONE MASS.

    Let them have their chapel building, you have a priest in Fr Starbuck.
    Beautifully said.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #246 on: January 28, 2022, 04:42:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Wiest is obviously not a priest.

    Do you buy into the following? (from the link)

    "Jesus personally ordained Abbatetto the priesthood and God told Abbate that he was born on Mars. After he died at age seven, he went to heaven. However, he only stayed there briefly as God wanted him to save humanity from perdition. Therefore, he was transported to earth and reborn in a family in Isnello." (Reincarnation?)

    Did you miss this part?

    Abbate “ordained” Schweikert and after Abbate died, "Archbishop" Schweikert was enthroned in 1968 as the Celestial Messenger’s successor.

    Schweikert “ordained” Rematt and in 1988 Schweikert died and was succeeded by "Archbishop" Rematt.

    None of them were valid: not Abbate, not Schweikert, not Rematt and not Wiest.
    Abbate did NOT ordain Schweikert. Read it again.
    https://wrldrels.org/2020/05/10/new-jerusalem-church-of-the-celestial-messenger/

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #247 on: January 28, 2022, 04:44:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Abbate did NOT ordain Schweikert. Read it again.
    https://wrldrels.org/2020/05/10/new-jerusalem-church-of-the-celestial-messenger/
    1955 (June 4):  John E. Schweikert was ordained a priest in the North American Old Roman Catholic Church.
    1958 (June 8):  Schweikert was consecrated a bishop in the North American Old Roman Catholic Church.
    1963 (October 13):  Abbate died, and Marianna Monachino, the Mother General of The Order of Our Most Blessed Mother, Queen of Peace Reincarnated, took over the administration of the New Jerusalem Church.
    1964–1965?:  The Mother General approached the Roman Catholic Diocese of Chicago, trying to convince them to send a priest who could administer the sacraments in the Sacred Heart of Jesus Church.
    1965:  By referral of Roman Catholic clergy, the Mother General contacted John E. Schweikert, who had recently become the Archbishop-Primate of the North American Old Roman Catholic Church. He accepted to administer the sacraments while investigating the status of the New Jerusalem Catholic Church.
    1965 (September 16):  Schweikert said his first Mass in the Sacred Heart of Jesus Church.
    1967 (December 1):  The Mother General appointed Schweikert the Successor of the Celestial Messenger, Giuseppe Maria Abbate, though Schweikert did not believe in Abbate’s divine status, nor accept his episcopal consecration.
    1968 (February 18):  Archbishop Schweikert was enthroned as the Celestial Messenger’s successor, and he was given the name Santo Padre Maria Michael I.

    Learn the distinction between weird, evil, bad, etc. and valid.


    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #248 on: January 28, 2022, 04:54:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Interesting.
    from your link:
    Quote
    Quote
    1965:  By referral of Roman Catholic clergy, the Mother General contacted John E. Schweikert, who had recently become the Archbishop-Primate of the North American Old Roman Catholic Church. He accepted to administer the sacraments while investigating the status of the New Jerusalem Catholic Church.

    Two problems with Wiest:
    1. The Old Catholic Church is NOT Catholic.
    2. The "line" he is from is an Abbate cult.


    What  follows is from the same link:
    https://wrldrels.org/2020/05/10/new-jerusalem-church-of-the-celestial-messenger/
    (N.B. Written by supporters of the Abbate cult)/

    n 1919, Abbate’s New Jerusalem Catholic was incorporated by the State of Illinois. The trust agreement which was appended to the application included clauses on the church organization and Abbate’s role in it. The New Jerusalem Catholic Church was defined as a hierarchical organization governed by a single individual, Giuseppe Maria Abbate. He was “the sole Trustee of the Church,” and the docuмent underlined his absolute authority and his uniqueness as the divinely elect Celestial Messenger and the Celestial Father. Although he might have successors as the church leader, none would have the same elevated status that he had.

    As a way to counteract Abbate and his Church, in 1919, the Roman Catholics inaugurated the St. Callistus parish at 2167 DeKalb Street, just a few blocks away from the New Jerusalem Church headquarters, which was pastored by Italian clergy. The Archdiocese explicitly stated that the foundation was a reaction to the local presence of Abbate and his congregation. Moreover, on Sundays and feast days, Roman Catholic clergy stood outside the Celestial Father’s Church telling the faithful that they were automatically excommunicated if they attended the religious services there.

    1967 (December 1):  The Mother General appointed Schweikert the Successor of the Celestial Messenge

    Archbishop Schweikert was enthroned as the Celestial Messenger’s successor, and he was given the name Santo Padre Maria Michael I

    Schweikert died and was succeeded by Archbishop Rematt.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And yet, the school board expects us to accept that Rematt  "ordained" Wiest?
    No wonder neither he nor they concocted this story until now.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #249 on: January 28, 2022, 05:14:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That has zero to do with validity. Do you understand the distinction? A man may indeed be downright evil but still confer valid sacraments. I have not seen anyone here, including me, claim that he is a good priest or that he should not be investigated, or that anyone should receive sacraments from him.
    If he is a priest, he should be addressed as Father, not to honor him but to honor HIM.
    If he is a priest, he would be an option in an emergency situation. If I were near death and my choices were no priest or valid but weird priest guess what? I would choose the weirdo.
    That is a big If, at the center of this whole issue. And yes I understand the distinction but I don't think you see the severity of the problem. Let me stress this point, kids are potentially in danger by having someone with a position of authority be around them without being properly identified, not just as a priest but as any grown adult would have in position of authority before children, whether it be a teacher, principal on in this case including a priest, etc. that has that level of access to children and trust from children. I'm not accusing him of anything, just making an observation that having that position of authority could be abused and I would hope that said position of authority would be scrutinized.

    How can he defend, protect and impart the faith while doing things that could endanger the faith? Now a chapel is divided over this. I doubt a good priest that understands the privilege of the priesthood would let all these questions about his validity and basic identification clutter the minds of his sheep making them scatter.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #250 on: January 28, 2022, 05:16:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Interesting.
    from your link:
    Quote
    Two problems with Wiest:
    1. The Old Catholic Church is NOT Catholic.
    2. The "line" he is from is an Abbate cult.


    What  follows is from the same link:
    https://wrldrels.org/2020/05/10/new-jerusalem-church-of-the-celestial-messenger/
    (N.B. Written by supporters of the Abbate cult)/

    n 1919, Abbate’s New Jerusalem Catholic was incorporated by the State of Illinois. The trust agreement which was appended to the application included clauses on the church organization and Abbate’s role in it. The New Jerusalem Catholic Church was defined as a hierarchical organization governed by a single individual, Giuseppe Maria Abbate. He was “the sole Trustee of the Church,” and the docuмent underlined his absolute authority and his uniqueness as the divinely elect Celestial Messenger and the Celestial Father. Although he might have successors as the church leader, none would have the same elevated status that he had.

    As a way to counteract Abbate and his Church, in 1919, the Roman Catholics inaugurated the St. Callistus parish at 2167 DeKalb Street, just a few blocks away from the New Jerusalem Church headquarters, which was pastored by Italian clergy. The Archdiocese explicitly stated that the foundation was a reaction to the local presence of Abbate and his congregation. Moreover, on Sundays and feast days, Roman Catholic clergy stood outside the Celestial Father’s Church telling the faithful that they were automatically excommunicated if they attended the religious services there.

    1967 (December 1):  The Mother General appointed Schweikert the Successor of the Celestial Messenge

    Archbishop Schweikert was enthroned as the Celestial Messenger’s successor, and he was given the name Santo Padre Maria Michael I

    Schweikert died and was succeeded by Archbishop Rematt.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And yet, the school board expects us to accept that Rematt  "ordained" Wiest?
    No wonder neither he nor they concocted this story until now.
    1) Sacraments from the Old Catholics, including Holy Orders, are generally considered valid, just like Eastern Orthodox.
    2) You edited the quote (accidentally, I'm sure), here's the full one:

    Quote
    1955 (June 4):  John E. Schweikert was ordained a priest in the North American Old Roman Catholic Church.
    1958 (June 8):  Schweikert was consecrated a bishop in the North American Old Roman Catholic Church.
    1963 (October 13):  Abbate died, and Marianna Monachino, the Mother General of The Order of Our Most Blessed Mother, Queen of Peace Reincarnated, took over the administration of the New Jerusalem Church.
    1964–1965?:  The Mother General approached the Roman Catholic Diocese of Chicago, trying to convince them to send a priest who could administer the sacraments in the Sacred Heart of Jesus Church.
    1965:  By referral of Roman Catholic clergy, the Mother General contacted John E. Schweikert, who had recently become the Archbishop-Primate of the North American Old Roman Catholic Church. He accepted to administer the sacraments while investigating the status of the New Jerusalem Catholic Church.
    1965 (September 16):  Schweikert said his first Mass in the Sacred Heart of Jesus Church.
    1967 (December 1):  The Mother General appointed Schweikert the Successor of the Celestial Messenger, Giuseppe Maria Abbate, though Schweikert did not believe in Abbate’s divine status, nor accept his episcopal consecration.
    1968 (February 18):  Archbishop Schweikert was enthroned as the Celestial Messenger’s successor, and he was given the name Santo Padre Maria Michael I.




    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #251 on: January 28, 2022, 05:18:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • OLHC held their meeting last night in the church hall, announcing that they have a letter saying that Wiest was ordained in the North American Old Roman Catholic Church (NAORCC) by Bishop Rematt.



    P.S. The school board said they asked Wiest for his drivers’ license and he said he lost it.

    For details on Wiest’s cult, see:
    https://wrldrels.org/2020/05/10/new-jerusalem-church-of-the-celestial-messenger/
    Horrifying. 

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #252 on: January 28, 2022, 05:24:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is information on Rematt, the "Bishop" who supposedly "ordainded" Wiest. Please note that it is written by supporters of the Abbatte cult.

    https://wrldrels.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/New-Jerusalem-Church.pdf

    Theodore Rematt (1945–2016). When Rematt took over after Archbishop Schweikert’s death ...an anonymous woman contacted Rematt by telephone, .  she told him to go into a closet in one of the bedrooms of the rectory. There, behind a false panel, he would find all the proof he needed.

    Behind the secret panel Rematt, indeed, encountered abundant docuмentation on the Padre Celeste and the history of the New Jerusalem Catholic Church of the Celestial Messenger: transcripts from his trials, (for sɛҳuąƖ abuse of young teen girls) affidavits of support, church publications, and photos. Rematt was shocked by what he read; the founder of the church had believed that he was God and he had been convicted for several serious crimes and declared criminally insane.

    Rematt ... destroyed all the files. Later on, when other traces of Abbate and his activities were encountered, he ordered that they should be destroyed, as well.(This is called a cover-up.)

    Rematt ... argued for legal continuity with the church Abbate founded in
    1919, and that he, as Abbate’s legal successor was the sole trustee and
    had absolute authority to make decisions, financial and otherwise.
    ($$$$$)


    the journalist quoted Sister Maria Bernadette as saying:
    "If this were the Roman Catholic Church, the nuns presumably could transfer to another convent beyond the jurisdiction with whom they were at loggerheads. But Sacred Heart of Jesus is suigeneris, a unique foundation established by Joseph Abbate"
    (They were NOT Catholic.)

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #253 on: January 28, 2022, 05:25:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 1) Sacraments from the Old Catholics, including Holy Orders, are generally considered valid, just like Eastern Orthodox.
    2) You edited the quote (accidentally, I'm sure), here's the full one:
    Nice try Mr. Wiest.

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: More weirdness from “Fr.” Michael Wiest at OLHC
    « Reply #254 on: January 28, 2022, 05:28:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That is a big If, at the center of this whole issue. And yes I understand the distinction but I don't think you see the severity of the problem. Let me stress this point, kids are potentially in danger by having someone with a position of authority be around them without being properly identified, not just as a priest but as any grown adult would have in position of authority before children, whether it be a teacher, principal on in this case including a priest, etc. that has that level of access to children and trust from children. I'm not accusing him of anything, just making an observation that having that position of authority could be abused and I would hope that said position of authority would be scrutinized.

    How can he defend, protect and impart the faith while doing things that could endanger the faith? Now a chapel is divided over this. I doubt a good priest that understands the privilege of the priesthood would let all these questions about his validity and basic identification clutter the minds of his sheep making them scatter.
    When did I or anyone else say that Fr. Wiest should be trusted with anything, especially children?

    The reason that I bothered to get into this in the first place is because of the adamant insistence of some that Fr. Wiest is definitely not a priest and MUST be addressed as Mr.

    The priesthood does not belong to the man who has received it, it is from God Himself. So even if I wouldn't trust the guy to mow my lawn, the priesthood MUST be respected. Is what I am trying to say a bit clearer now?