Author Topic: Cloaks and Daggers - II (Read 12188 times)

Peregrine · « **on:** March 02, 2012, 01:16:27 PM »

An Overview & Plea

Heartfelt thanks to Hobbledehoy, who has done a masterful job in the original thread to expose the perilous agenda of the Toth-Gebel-gαye-Hall group. As usual, people with little or nothing to contribute to the substance of the matter have cluttered things up and/or derailed the topic, so this is an attempt to get back on track.

A brief overview: When Fr. Ramolla was unjustly expelled from St. Gertrude the Great church in November 2009, the above named persons, along with many others, rushed to his defense. More importantly, they worked hard to establish St. Albert the Great church and St. Anthony of Padua chapel, under Fr. Ramolla's pastorship. This was the Catholic response to an absurd calamity brought about by the behavior of Bp. Dolan and Fr. Cekada.

But this was apparently not enough for the little group, so they felt compelled to launch a campaign to "destroy Dolan, Cekada, and Sanborn." We assume they were motivated by the desire to remove some of the evil that inevitably seeps into God's Church. Tragically, however, they chose shockingly base tactics, more worthy of demons than of Catholics. Their notoriously vile websites (VoVwatch, Pistrina Liturgica, RCcorner, LayPulpit, etc.) seemed to compete with each other on which could spew the most vulgar bashing of their intended victims whose numbers grew to include anyone they perceived as opposing their ultimate agenda. Not content with exposing facts, which evidently failed to "destroy" their targets, they resorted to clever ridicule, hideous mockery, and outright vicious calumny. And despite their feverish efforts, they have still failed to destroy their targets.

As Hobbledehoy explained, it appears that their ultimate goal is to transform the Catholic Church into a non-Catholic institution under the absolute control of the laity. Rather than parishes having lay boards that assist with the financial and material management of the church, their goal is to have the clergy completely subordinate to the lay boards.

When Father Ramolla, whom they first championed, took immediate action and dismissed a member of the clergy whose behavior was a danger to the parishioners and seminarians, he transgressed their fundamental premise by acting as a real Catholic priest rather than as a lowly employee who cannot move without consulting the lay board and obtaining their permission.

As a result, the Toth-gαye-Gebel-Hall troop is feverishly working to destroy Father Ramolla and replace him with other clergy who will compliantly serve as their sacrament-dispensing puppets.

HOW TRAGIC ! At this time more than ever the Catholic Church desperately needs intelligent and energetic soldiers of Christ who pour their hearts and souls into building up the Body of Christ. Yet here we have intelligent and energetic persons claiming to be Catholic while tearing apart the fragile remnant on earth.

Craig: Everyone acknowledges your academic abilities and clever writing. But rather than wasting time on destructive diatribes, which may give you some kind of sadistic pleasure, why not use your gifts to build up the few existing oases of Catholicism?

Jim: Your first letters to SGG parishioners were beautifully written and inspiring. How could you sink to such vulgarity and dishonesty on the Lay Pulpit? That is not the way to persuade people to seek the truth and correct errors. You can do so much more for God by keeping to the high road.

Janet: You are a firebrand eager to defend the Church. In the past, clergy have voraciously devoured your generous resources, and it's understandable that you want to prevent such clerical abuse in the future. But locking the clergy in an iron cage is not the solution. You know from experience that there are no perfect priests, and sooner or later they all have failings. We have to do the best we can to keep them on the path of holiness, by our prayer and gentle reproaches, not by whips and cages.

Father Hall: You have been taken advantage of and suffered terrible mistreatment by other clergy, and it's understandable that you are inclined to go along with the idea of absolute control by lay boards. Yet you surely know that the laity are just as weak and fallible as the clergy, so it is preposterous to hand over to them the rightful role of the clergy. I pray that you will once again turn your efforts to supporting what few chapels we have, even though they may be somewhat flawed.

Readers on the CathInfo forum: Please let's all pray harder than ever during this time of Lent that the Holy Ghost will lavish His Gifts, especially wisdom, piety and fortitude, on His poor bedraggled little army on earth. Amen.

Peregrine · « **Reply #1 on:** March 03, 2012, 12:36:44 PM »

Cupertino, seriously, there is no need for me or anyone to give personal explanations of our knowledge of details, support of efforts, familiarity with individuals, change of opinions, etc. This is precisely the sort of thing that clutters up and derails the threads.

However, since you have a personal interest in this and asked publicly, I will reply briefly but will not engage in further discussion that is not directly on topic.

There were two campaigns. Hopefully, my dates are correct.

(1) To "destroy D/C/S" - This entered the public arena in June 2010 with the launch of Pistrina Liturgica, whose initial goal was to discredit Fr. Cekada's book. I supported this in the beginning, as the book indeed has many flaws. Later Pistrina took on MHT Seminary, and I felt it made some valid points. Progressively the editorials became repulsive. Recently it has begun promoting Campaign 2.

VoVwatch was launched in January 2011, and I was in favor of the general idea but horrified at the style and in no way supported it.

(2) To reduce the clergy to impotent employees of lay boards. This became public with RCcorner in February 2011, and from the start I opposed it.

I believed that T-G-G-H were sincere in wanting to help the Church and generally encouraged their efforts, while at the same time expressing my dismay at some of their methods.

At this point, the group is simply wreaking havoc on the Church, and I am praying hard for each of them to come to their senses.

insidebaseball · « **Reply #2 on:** March 03, 2012, 03:34:12 PM »

Excellent points peregrine. Pride can find its way into what started out to be a good response to injustice. We need not keep feeding the fire of this dispute but pray for some sort of good resulotion. I know some here on cathinfo want to bury anyone that doesn't agree with them on this issue, and that is the sure sign of pride.

Peregrine · « **Reply #3 on:** March 03, 2012, 06:22:07 PM »

Quote

... I hardly think my questions to you either clutters or derails anything.

:roll-laugh1:

Elizabeth · « **Reply #4 on:** March 03, 2012, 08:13:10 PM »

Quote from: Peregrine

Cupertino, seriously, there is no need for me or anyone to give personal explanations of our knowledge of details, support of efforts, familiarity with individuals, change of opinions, etc. This is precisely the sort of thing that clutters up and derails the threads.
.

If this is so, why not ask Matthew to lock your thread so nobody clutters it up by responding to you?

Hobbledehoy · « **Reply #5 on:** March 03, 2012, 08:24:56 PM »

Thank you very much Peregrine!

Quote from: Peregrine

(2) To reduce the clergy to impotent employees of lay boards.

Indeed this is the ultimate goal of the cabal, and the lay-board of St. Albert's does not seem to realize the great peril that is threatening to destroy any potential rehabilitation of tranquility that was disturbed by the betrayal of gαye and Hall in October and November of last year.

Forsooth, Toth, as an excellent Americanist, has began a political campaign of sorts, as elections to the new lay-board at St. Albert's are about to begin:

http://www.pistrinaliturgica.blogspot.com/2012/03/iron-time-of-doubt.html

Quote

Perhaps in the Sede Vacante we can't expect mere men to behave well. With no hierarchy, there is no locus of control to keep an error-prone man from pursuing material advantages and earthly prestige at the expense of his brother and sister. For some stout souls, the answer is to cross these hungry status-seekers off and stay home alone. For others, however, the need for some form of Catholic community and the sacraments urges them to remain with such clergy notwithstanding the nagging doubts and the absence of longed-for consolation.

If you are among the latter, you have an option. You don't simply have to take it. You can start by taking back your chapels. You are not powerless or without resources. You hold the pursestrings, and you can demand that your clergy clean up their act. But you must act together -- as a community -- if you want the peace you've been searching for.

When at last the Restoration gives us a sovereign Roman pontiff, Catholicism can return to a monarchy, but in the Sede Vacante, we must have a democracy to protect us from men grievously ailing from the effects of original sin. [emphases mine]

How can a monarchy be restored with a democracy? It may theoretically work in secular constructs, but not with the Church.

As I have written in times past, these people are taking advantage of the exceedingly devastated predicament of the Church in order to establish a lay-controlled church, suited to their tastes.

This last post at Pristina, as the more recent posts there, have been specifically addressed to the "the educated and affluent Traddie minority" - in this case being the members or potential members of the lay-board of St. Albert's.

If "the educated and affluent Traddie minority" at Fairfield pays heed to the absurdities of Toth, then the faithful shall unfortunately pay a heavy price.

The faithful want a Priest: yet the lay-boards, according to this new lay-ecclesiology, would have him merely adorning the sacred Altar, and little else more. Yet Toth and his crew would readily point and wag fingers when the very Priest whom they were treating as a "sacramental machine" (as Toth put it) suddenly decides to be just that: a walking Ciborium, distanced and disenchanted, willing to leave everything behind at the first chance.

What sort of an example is that for the younger generations, for the Seminarians? I would not blame them if they left the Seminary, if that is the future that awaits them: to be the play-ball of dissensions and board meetings, to be threatened and intimidated, atop of the anxieties and Crosses that are concomitant with Priesthood, especially in our day.

This, this is ultimately what Toth wants apparently: for others to be turned away from the Priesthood, or to seek it with the intention of pleasing these over-powered layfolk, and truly have a "lay Church" - the sixteenth chapter of the Prophecy of Ezechiel to be realized once again. [/size][/font]

Canute · « **Reply #6 on:** March 04, 2012, 01:32:41 PM »

I can second Cupertino for reminding Peregrine that the leaders of the attacks against SGG and its clergy were hard at work long before November 2009.

In addition to the ones Cupertino mentions, Gebel had circulated an attack letter of his own in July 2008, Bernard Hall had been attacking the SGG school principal and meddling in his (the principal's) family since May 2009, and Fr. Ramolla had been badmouthing Bp. Dolan, Fr. Cekada, Bp. Sanborn and the seminary all over Europe during his 2009 summer vacation.

By September 2009 the revolutionaries had everything organized to lure other unwitting souls to their side with agitprop, to whip these people up into a mob mentality and to launch an attack on many fronts once the signal was given. Like the French Revolution, anyone with even slightest gripe was sympathized with and welcomed into the mob, just as long as you were "against the regime." Power to the people!

All this is in Fr. Cekada's "School Dazed" article of November 23, 2009, which I recommend that everyone read:

http://www.fathercekada.com/2009/11/23/school-dazed/

As soon as Hall was fired, he and Janet gαye invited Fr. Jenkins over to their house to meet SGG parishioners that Hall was trying to disaffect -- Fr. Jenkins, who didn't even consider Fr. Ramolla a PRIEST and would have refused the sacraments to Hall two weeks early! Like Arabs, the revolutionaries believed "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

So, Peregrine, the Ramolla revolution wasn't just "a good idea" that went bad in 2010, as you seem to say, because those who fomented it had been doing their evil work for a very long time. It was bad from the beginning, and its leaders hurt a lot of good people, some of whom will not even go to Mass now as a result.

A supposedly religiously-motivated undertaking that began so badly, by being fired by hate, grudges and gossip, was bound to end badly. The leaders and cheerleaders of the revolution (Fr. Ramolla, Hall, gαye, Gebel, Shea, Toth, Droleskey, etc.) ended up turning against each other, just like the revolutionaries in France did, and after two and a half years, there's now no bishop (apart from the tainted Slupski) or priest who will have anything to do with Fr. Ramolla. Meanwhile, many Catholics he initially lured away from SGG have figured out they were sold a bill of goods and have left St. Albert's.

Once you stir up hate and unleash it, it blinds you and there's no telling where it will end up.

SJB · « **Reply #7 on:** March 04, 2012, 02:44:03 PM »

Quote from: Rawhide/Bazz/Nonno/Cupertino

Instead, I, a stranger, immediately got a PM from SJB here trying to convince me of it. The most vile campaign worthy of demons started quite early and still smolders.

First off, you're no stranger. Secondly, I told you where to go to verify. I did this because this person can verify it. If he was unwilling to talk, then you could have dismissed it. Instead of trying to verify with the source, you made it public.

You're not interested in the truth, you're interested in your own agenda.

SJB · « **Reply #8 on:** March 04, 2012, 02:55:48 PM »

Quote from: Canute

By September 2009 the revolutionaries had everything organized to lure other unwitting souls to their side with agitprop, to whip these people up into a mob mentality and to launch an attack on many fronts once the signal was given. Like the French Revolution, anyone with even slightest gripe was sympathized with and welcomed into the mob, just as long as you were "against the regime." Power to the people!

As I've shown previously, the problem in Columbus was the taking of the building fund and changing of locks, etc. ... all done by Fr. Cekada and Bp. Dolan. This happened before anybody left St. Clares. The SGG cabal decided that they would liquidate the Columbus chapel, something they had tried in 2006 when the chapel went up for sale one fall day without anybody knowing until the sign appeared in the front yard. This, combined with the fact Fr. Cekada didn't show his face in Columbus for many months and neither he nor Bp. Dolan ever attempted to explain or contact any of the parishioners personally, something they always did in the previous scandals the hot-headed Bp. Dolan usually created.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #9 on:** March 04, 2012, 03:13:15 PM »

SJB,

With all due respect, you have lost your marbles. You insist on incessantly attacking the SGG and Traditional clergy in general in nearly every thread you post on. You completely ignore any and all advice to let the subject drop. You accuse Canute of having his own agenda, yet it is clear from your posts that your agenda is to continually slander not just the SGG, but anyone else you don't like (i.e Malachi Martin).

I am not an SGG supporter, but you must give credit where credit is due. You look at me, I have issues with the FSSP and their theological position, but you don't see me constantly criticizing them. You know why? Because they still do SOME good. They are part of the Traditional clergy, and thus I still respect them, even though I disagree with their position.

You have stated your case against the SGG time and time again ever since the "Bishop Pivarunas Big Blunder" thread. You've been asked by numerous people to stop, but you won't listen because you are consumed by pride. You have an axe to grind and won't rest until you destroy the SGG's reputation. That is precisely why Eamon was the only ally you had here. Now that he has left you have no one on your side, and that isn't because this forum is full of SGG supporters, most people here don't support the SGG. Rather, it is because no one else here wants to spend their entire time slamming Traditional priests.

You seem to hold grudges against people who disagree with you, even if they don't support the SGG, and even hold grudges against those who tell you to stop. Raoul kindly told you last week that you lack humility, to which you gave a smart-aleck answer. You also started your slander campaign against Malachi Martin the other day in an attempt to re-ignite your feud with Elizabeth, and when she didn't respond you made two more posts trying to grab her attention. Your intent is simply to go around the forums picking fights with other users. And when someone tells you that you've gone too far, your only response is "don't read this discussion then".

Your posts have made it blatantly obvious that you do not have much respect for the Traditional clergy. You've whined and ranted about this for months, wasting all of your time and spiritual knowledge railing against the clergy. It's time to give this issue a rest already.

I expect the same response from you that you have given everyone else, but you really need to consider what I've said. If you keep this up, you will develop a resentment towards all priests, which can be very dangerous to the soul. Stop and examine your conscience.

God Bless.

Canute · « **Reply #10 on:** March 04, 2012, 05:51:12 PM »

Quote from: Cupertino

2) the idea that Fr. Ramolla was suddenly and suprisingly fired for speaking "truth to power" from the pulpit of his employers, as if to give the impression that he was a martyr for "truth" and a victim.

BTW, the source of the cliché "speaking truth to power" is an 15 Aug. 1942 letter by Bayard Rustin, leftist agitator, card-carrying socialist, gαy rights activist and buddy of Martin Luther King -- a great role model for leading a revolution.

SJB · « **Reply #11 on:** March 04, 2012, 06:16:34 PM »

Quote from: SS

With all due respect, you have lost your marbles. You insist on incessantly attacking the SGG and Traditional clergy in general in nearly every thread you post on. You completely ignore any and all advice to let the subject drop. You accuse Canute of having his own agenda, yet it is clear from your posts that your agenda is to continually slander not just the SGG, but anyone else you don't like (i.e Malachi Martin).

Oh yes, SS, "all due respect' then you say "you've lost your marbles?"

I have never "attacked" the Traditional clergy in general, whatever that might mean. Why don't you call for Rawhide/Bazz/Nonno/Cupertino to let the subjects drop? Here is a guy who keeps appearing under different pseudonyms and has a history of getting involved in controversies, yet you give him a pass? Why?

Are you supporting Malachi Martin? Or merely critical of any criticism because it is criticism ... maybe because it's somebody you happen to like? You pop into these threads that you claim not to care about, begging them to stop. Why? It seems really strange unless you simply have nothing better to do ... I haven't checked, but do you do this on other threads?

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #12 on:** March 04, 2012, 08:49:26 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Oh yes, SS, "all due respect' then you say "you've lost your marbles?"

Ok, perhaps I should have said "you've gone overboard". I'm sorry for saying you've lost your marbles.

Quote

I have never "attacked" the Traditional clergy in general, whatever that might mean.

You've been railing against Bishop Dolan and Father Cekada ever since the Bishop Pivarunas thread in September. I consider that attacking the Traditional clergy. If you have a problem with them, it would be better to state your case once, then leave it and just pray for them.

Quote

Why don't you call for Rawhide/Bazz/Nonno/Cupertino to let the subjects drop? Here is a guy who keeps appearing under different pseudonyms and has a history of getting involved in controversies, yet you give him a pass? Why?

I have no proof that Canute or Cupertino are Rawhide, Sheenan, or any of Cekada's other supporters/friends, so it wouldn't do me much justice to accuse them of being so without proof. They could simply just be SGG supporters/attenders.

From what I've read, basically Eamon was kicked out of the SGG for various reasons and began a campaign against them (Cekada in particular) here in 2009. My guess would be that Fr. Cekada was randomly reading this site one day, saw Eamon criticizing the SGG, and sent some friends of his (Rawhide, Sheenan, and whoever else, and perhaps even posted himself) to refute Eamon's claims. I don't mean to sound like an SGG defender but, so what? That pales in comparison to what Bishop Fellay did in the fall of 2010, when he threatened to sue Ignis Ardens because some members there were posting the truth about the situation between him and Bishop Williamson (I don't know all the details, I'm just using that as an example). Even Matthew doesn't seem to really mind the SGG crowd here anymore as long as they behave. That's why he let skifast come back as "gunfighter". So if some people here defend the SGG, what place do I have to tell them what group they can and can't support? I don't necessarily agree with them, but that's up to them, not me.

Quote

Are you supporting Malachi Martin?

I believe the slander campaign against him is rather absurd. No proof that he was a double-agent exists, except for certain biased docuмentaries that provide nothing to back up their claims.

Quote

Or merely critical of any criticism because it is criticism ... maybe because it's somebody you happen to like?

I don't know where you got that idea from. I thought I made it pretty clear that I'm not an SGG supporter. My posts also show that I criticize where criticism is due.

Quote

You pop into these threads that you claim not to care about, begging them to stop. Why? It seems really strange unless you simply have nothing better to do ... I haven't checked, but do you do this on other threads?

You are changing the subject. This isn't about me, it's about your apparent contempt for the Traditional clergy and your refusal to let go of the SGG subject.

Are you even a sedevacantist, SJB? I believe you've said before that you are, but if so, why do you spend your entire time on this forum slamming sede priests but not Benedict and Vatican II? I mean, what sedevacantist does that? There are many more people who need to be told the truth about Benedict and Vatican II, than people who need to be told the "truth" about a small sede group.

Emerentiana · « **Reply #13 on:** March 04, 2012, 08:58:42 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

SJB,

With all due respect, you have lost your marbles. You insist on incessantly attacking the SGG and Traditional clergy in general in nearly every thread you post on. You completely ignore any and all advice to let the subject drop. You accuse Canute of having his own agenda, yet it is clear from your posts that your agenda is to continually slander not just the SGG, but anyone else you don't like (i.e Malachi Martin).

I am not an SGG supporter, but you must give credit where credit is due. You look at me, I have issues with the FSSP and their theological position, but you don't see me constantly criticizing them. You know why? Because they still do SOME good. They are part of the Traditional clergy, and thus I still respect them, even though I disagree with their position.

You have stated your case against the SGG time and time again ever since the "Bishop Pivarunas Big Blunder" thread. You've been asked by numerous people to stop, but you won't listen because you are consumed by pride. You have an axe to grind and won't rest until you destroy the SGG's reputation. That is precisely why Eamon was the only ally you had here. Now that he has left you have no one on your side, and that isn't because this forum is full of SGG supporters, most people here don't support the SGG. Rather, it is because no one else here wants to spend their entire time slamming Traditional priests.

You seem to hold grudges against people who disagree with you, even if they don't support the SGG, and even hold grudges against those who tell you to stop. Raoul kindly told you last week that you lack humility, to which you gave a smart-aleck answer. You also started your slander campaign against Malachi Martin the other day in an attempt to re-ignite your feud with Elizabeth, and when she didn't respond you made two more posts trying to grab her attention. Your intent is simply to go around the forums picking fights with other users. And when someone tells you that you've gone too far, your only response is "don't read this discussion then".

Your posts have made it blatantly obvious that you do not have much respect for the Traditional clergy. You've whined and ranted about this for months, wasting all of your time and spiritual knowledge railing against the clergy. It's time to give this issue a rest already.

I expect the same response from you that you have given everyone else, but you really need to consider what I've said. If you keep this up, you will develop a resentment towards all priests, which can be very dangerous to the soul. Stop and examine your conscience.

God Bless.

:applause: :applause:

SJB · « **Reply #14 on:** March 04, 2012, 09:26:52 PM »

Quote from: SS

You are changing the subject. This isn't about me, it's about your apparent contempt for the Traditional clergy ...

How is that apparent ? I've been critical of specific events of which I have personal knowledge. You make the claim of a general contempt, yet you can't give any examples?