I don't really follow the SGG stuff but Father Cekada does have a highly inappropriate way of speaking for a priest. Especially one who is under fire. This is from a letter he wrote to someone about Terri Schiavo, that I just happened to find today on a French website of all places:
"3. A wicked husband still maintains his headship over the wife before God and his "domestic and paternal authority."
He has the right to say yes or no to ice chips and Jello, unless and until an ecclesiastical or civil court, for a grave and just reason, legitimately impedes him from exercising his right.
Compromise on that principle, and the family is toast."
Is he really joking about Schiavo being fed "ice chips and jello"? Does this man have any sense of propriety? I can make jokes like that on CathInfo, not that I would about a subject like this, but he is a priest responding to a concerned parishioner about a volatile controversy.
Also, what does a man starving his wife have to do with "domestic and paternal authority"? Then he tries to defend his opinion on the Schiavo case by making it look like he's standing up for the family, with the line, once again inappropriate, "compromise on that principle, and the family is toast."
"4. Finally, the larger problem I see is that lay traditionalists like you are trying to turn something into a mortal sin that isn't.
You have no business doing so. You don't have the training in moral theology that priests have, and you certainly don't have the confessional experience we do in applying moral principles."
That's exactly the defense he uses for NFP, by the way. And he also calls on Pius XII to justify his Schiavo decision. Uh-oh... Remember how regarding NFP, Pius XII says that "eugenic" considerations are a serious motive?
P.S. Father Cekada sounds exactly like Caminus. It's uncanny. I think I will give up sarcasm for good, I don't want to sound like this.