Author Topic: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon (Read 38808 times)

SupportFrStarbuck · « **Reply #270 on:** January 13, 2022, 12:03:32 PM »

BTW - Alert - Click the picture at the bottom of my previous post to see it enlarged.

pre1962 · « **Reply #271 on:** January 13, 2022, 12:07:28 PM »

Not only owning a shop from 2008-2010 but presumedly running the Eclipse shop from 2010 onward. That's an assumption, I realize. As late as 2015 he was the owner of this shop.

Now, to play devil's advocate (pun intended) if Father was ordained in the mid 1990's by a traditional Bishop somewhere and then left bereft of a priestly assignment, well that's another question. It's just that there's no real details available and there are a lot of people with serious doubts.

He wouldn't be the first traditional priest who had no way to minister and was forced to live and work in the world. I'm trying to explore all the angles here, but why the insistent blackout of information by the chapel board??

Cera · « **Reply #272 on:** January 13, 2022, 01:34:10 PM »

Quote from: pre1962 on January 13, 2022, 12:07:28 PM

Not only owning a shop from 2008-2010 but presumedly running the Eclipse shop from 2010 onward. That's an assumption, I realize. As late as 2015 he was the owner of this shop.

Now, to play devil's advocate (pun intended) if Father was ordained in the mid 1990's by a traditional Bishop somewhere and then left bereft of a priestly assignment, well that's another question. It's just that there's no real details available and there are a lot of people with serious doubts.

He wouldn't be the first traditional priest who had no way to minister and was forced to live and work in the world. I'm trying to explore all the angles here, but why the insistent blackout of information by the chapel board??

If that were the case, no problem would exist. Everyone would understand.
Something else is going on.

As you say, "why the insistent blackout of information by the chapel board??"
They must have believed some lie he told them in order to continue to "protect" him from concerned parents.

Friends at the chapel with children in the school attempted to talk to the school board and scheduled an appointment with one of the four members to discuss their concerns. The person then cancelled the scheduled meeting. What does that tell you?

Why are they stonewalling?

epiphany · « **Reply #273 on:** January 13, 2022, 07:36:25 PM »

Quote from: Thorn on January 12, 2022, 09:35:06 PM

Going to the police is an excellent idea. I always thought that there was a law that said that anyone working with children had to be checked out. I could be wrong. After the Boy Scout abuses came to light I thought that they tightened the laws. At the very least the police might be able to direct you on how to proceed. Certainly worth a try. If Weist gets wind of it & he's not who he says he is, then he just might disappear.

Yes, the police might be able to direct you on how to proceed.

It's o.k. if he disappears, isn't it?

the CA department of education codes clearly state that:
44237. Fingerprints; private school employees; criminal record information; list of teachers with revoked or suspended credentials; fees; confidentiality
(Note: This section is excerpted. To read the entire section, see EC 44237

.)
(a) Every person, firm, association, partnership, or corporation offering or conducting private school instruction on the elementary or high school level shall require each applicant for employment in a position requiring contact with minor pupils to submit two sets of fingerprints prepared for submittal by the employer to the Department of Justice for the purpose of obtaining criminal record summary information from the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(b)
(1) As used in this section, "employer" means every person, firm, association, partnership, or corporation offering or conducting private school instruction on the elementary or high school level.
(2) As use in this section, "employment" means the act of engaging the services of a person, who will have contact with pupils, to work in a position at a private school at the elementary or high school level on or after September 30, 1997, on a regular, paid full-time basis, regular, paid part-time basis or paid full- or part-time seasonal basis.
(3) As used in this section, "applicant" means any person who is seriously being considered for employment by an employer.
(4) This section does not apply to a secondary school pupil working at the school he or she attends or a parent or legal guardian working exclusively with his or her children.

I can't find who enforces these rules.
I would probably call the CA association of private school organizations and ask them for advice:
https://www.capso.org/

I no longer attend OLHC, so it doesn't make sense for me to call.

Come on families in CA complaining about OLHC and Wiest: stop complaining and ACT

epiphany · « **Reply #274 on:** January 13, 2022, 07:37:52 PM »

Quote from: SupportFrStarbuck on January 13, 2022, 12:00:06 PM

harborcountry-news.com

Click link below and choose the 2nd of the 4 photos: Who is this? Is this "Fr." Michael Wiest? If the link does not work just copy this and paste it into browser.

https://www.harborcountry-news.com/features/eclipse-shop-in-three-oaks-filled-with-treasures/article_63387aae-97f5-5004-b9bc-710fdf373563.html

THREE OAKS — The new Eclipse shop at 11 South Elm St. in Three Oaks is full of surprises.
Owner Michael Wiest said Eclipse features “antiques from the 18th Century up until the mid-20
the Century, and beyond” as well as contemporary art.

From 2008 until December 2010 Mr. Michael Wiest operated the Opulence shop in Three Oaks, which he said dealt mostly in furniture and traditional antiques.

Question: If so... what does a "priest" have to do with owning a antique store from 2008 to 2010?

not just any antique store but a Buddhist one!

SupportFrStarbuck · « **Reply #275 on:** January 14, 2022, 01:14:35 AM »

If this photo of "Fr." Michael Weist in 2020? in a farmer's market

Click this link:

https://www.harborcountry-news.com/features/three-oaks-farmers-market-filled-with-green-growing-things/article_56f10430-a50b-11ea-bfeb-cf3f97b3ae18.html

SupportFrStarbuck · « **Reply #276 on:** January 14, 2022, 01:16:57 AM »

It's the second of 5 photos...

SupportFrStarbuck · « **Reply #277 on:** January 14, 2022, 01:20:06 AM »

“He’s got the best rhubarb. I buy from him every year,” said customer Michael Wiest.

pre1962 · « **Reply #278 on:** January 14, 2022, 09:59:24 AM »

So, as late as 2020 he's in Michigan and (presumedly still?) running a Buddhist antique shop, and NOT in priestly ministry anywhere. Then he shows up at OLHC in early 2021 in full cassock and starts saying Mass etc.
???

Then there's the alleged full Buddhist altar in his home? That's been explored on the other threads.

Putting the very best foot forward (since I don't want to believe he's not a real priest), here's the only scenario I can think of: He was ordained in the 1990's by some bishop somewhere then left without an assignment or a chapel. Or he did minister somewhere for a time. He's been forced to live and work in the world in order to earn a living, perhaps saying Mass privately. He seems to know his way around the altar and the liturgy from what I've heard and seen.

The whole thing doesn't appear to make sense. Docuмenting and making public his history should be an easy task for the school board that appears to be running the show over there. A simple task, to put to rest the mystery and close these threads. If Fr. Perez were still alive (God rest his soul!) I imagine he would resolve this whole matter posthaste and Fr. Starbuck would still be there in Garden Grove.

epiphany · « **Reply #279 on:** January 14, 2022, 10:35:15 AM »

Quote from: pre1962 on January 14, 2022, 09:59:24 AM

So, as late as 2020 he's in Michigan and (presumedly still?) running a Buddhist antique shop, and NOT in priestly ministry anywhere. Then he shows up at OLHC in early 2021 in full cassock and starts saying Mass etc.
???

Then there's the alleged full Buddhist altar in his home? That's been explored on the other threads.

Putting the very best foot forward (since I don't want to believe he's not a real priest), here's the only scenario I can think of: He was ordained in the 1990's by some bishop somewhere then left without an assignment or a chapel. Or he did minister somewhere for a time. He's been forced to live and work in the world in order to earn a living, perhaps saying Mass privately. He seems to know his way around the altar and the liturgy from what I've heard and seen.

The whole thing doesn't appear to make sense. Docuмenting and making public his history should be an easy task for the school board that appears to be running the show over there. A simple task, to put to rest the mystery and close these threads. If Fr. Perez were still alive (God rest his soul!) I imagine he would resolve this whole matter posthaste and Fr. Starbuck would still be there in Garden Grove.

this is probably the most likely scenario.
my concern would be who ordained him?
if its someone like rutherford Johnson, that's a no-go (see photo and link below)

wiest said he was ordained in 1997 in Rome.

https://www.rutherfordjohnson.org/bio.html

Thorn · « **Reply #280 on:** January 14, 2022, 10:44:55 AM »

Most ordinary Catholics know what 'discalced' means. He doesn't.

When Fr. Perez was alive, he did nothing. What makes you think he'd now do something?

pre1962 · « **Reply #281 on:** January 14, 2022, 11:21:57 AM »

Quote from: epiphany on January 14, 2022, 10:35:15 AM

this is probably the most likely scenario.
my concern would be who ordained him?
if its someone like rutherford Johnson, that's a no-go (see photo and link below)

wiest said he was ordained in 1997 in Rome.

https://www.rutherfordjohnson.org/bio.html

I got a headache trying to get through this. "Archfather" ?? "Prince and Coadjutor of Rome" ??
The biography reads like something out of the Babylon Bee.
He also doesn't look much older than 17.

H.H.E. Archfather Papa Rutherford I (Cardinal Johnson-Ivrea-Italia-Barcelona), PhD, STD, JCD, ALM, FPRS, FRGS is Prince and Coadjutor of Rome in the Anglican Patriarchate, an Old Roman Catholic patriarchate with Anglican patrimony that focuses on its mandate of mission, service, and charity. A successor to the spiritual and temporal legacy of Pope Saint Leo X, the patriarchate is also descended from the ancient Roman Catholic See of Utrecht, which was granted independence by the Holy See in 1145, and from the Catholic See of Canterbury, England. The Patriarchate and the Anglo-Roman Rite represent an intangible cultural heritage.

epiphany · « **Reply #282 on:** January 14, 2022, 03:33:14 PM »

Quote from: pre1962 on January 14, 2022, 09:59:24 AM

If Fr. Perez were still alive (God rest his soul!) I imagine he would resolve this whole matter posthaste

Not sure this is a true statement:
1. Fr. Perez had ample time to ask Wiest for his papers.
2. Fr. Perez introduced Croisette as a "deacon" from the pulpit when Fr. Perez knew Croisette received the diaconate from Pfeiffer (which he did not announce from the pulpit), yet Fr. Perez was unsure if Pfeiffer was a bishop or not, referring to him as "Fr/b Pfeiffer".
3. Fr. Perez allowed Colletti for a long time.

Fr. Perez did not judge men who acted like priests, but he did judge women who acted like nuns.

Cera · « **Reply #283 on:** January 14, 2022, 04:17:13 PM »

Quote from: pre1962 on January 14, 2022, 09:59:24 AM

So, as late as 2020 he's in Michigan and (presumedly still?) running a Buddhist antique shop, and NOT in priestly ministry anywhere. Then he shows up at OLHC in early 2021 in full cassock and starts saying Mass etc.
???

Then there's the alleged full Buddhist altar in his home? That's been explored on the other threads.

Putting the very best foot forward (since I don't want to believe he's not a real priest), here's the only scenario I can think of: He was ordained in the 1990's by some bishop somewhere then left without an assignment or a chapel. Or he did minister somewhere for a time. He's been forced to live and work in the world in order to earn a living, perhaps saying Mass privately. He seems to know his way around the altar and the liturgy from what I've heard and seen.

The whole thing doesn't appear to make sense. Docuмenting and making public his history should be an easy task for the school board that appears to be running the show over there. A simple task, to put to rest the mystery and close these threads. If Fr. Perez were still alive (God rest his soul!) I imagine he would resolve this whole matter posthaste and Fr. Starbuck would still be there in Garden Grove.

As much as we would all like to believe that explanation, it does not explain why he repeatedly adamantly refused to show his drivers' license.

Nor does it explain why he refuses to say when, where or by whom he was ordained and in what rite.

Nor does it explain why he changed his name from whatever it was before -- to the name he is using now, Michael Wiest.

We know that not only did "Father Michael Wiest" never exist on paper anywhere, but Mr. Michael Wiest never existed either except for the two items in the Three Rivers newspaper (and information gathered by doing a reverse look-up from the phone number of Mr. Michael Wiest given in one news article.)

In the internet age, it is impossible for someone to have no record of his existence, unless it was deliberately disappeared by an expert.

epiphany · « **Reply #284 on:** January 14, 2022, 08:53:06 PM »

Quote from: Cera on January 14, 2022, 04:17:13 PM

In the internet age, it is impossible for someone to have no record of his existence, unless it was deliberately disappeared by an expert.

I beg to differ.
Wiest has SOME info about him on the internet, just not a lot. Probably with more digging, more could be found.
But you won't find much about me on the internet, so it is possible if you have been careful.

Author Topic: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon (Read 38808 times)

SupportFrStarbuck

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

pre1962

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

Cera

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

epiphany

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

epiphany

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

SupportFrStarbuck

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

SupportFrStarbuck

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

SupportFrStarbuck

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

pre1962

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

epiphany

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

Thorn

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

pre1962

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

epiphany

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

Cera

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon

epiphany

Re: OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon