Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Cera on December 19, 2021, 05:34:20 PM
-
Why was today's live-streamed 10 a.m. Mass blacked out? Below is the sermon given by Father Starbuck at the 7:30 Mass. He also gave it at the 10 a.m. Mass which was to be live-streamed on You Tube.
However, a layperson attempting to take over the chapel banged on the confessional door and demanded that Father Starbuck "desist" from repeating this sermon.
Father did give the sermon, however for unexplained reasons, the sermon was not videotaped and live-streamed as the 10 a.m. Mass always is. Here is the sermon that the laypersons attempting to take over the chapel do not want you to see.
19 December 2021
Sunday
I had a sermon prepared for this morning. However,there are some matters of business that do not allow ofdeferral. Therefore, I will present that sermon at a later time.
I have always tried to be truthful and to do the rightthing. And sometimes I have paid a price for that. Butplease know this about me: I will always try to be
honest with you and to fulfill my commitment to youas a public servant and as a priest. I want to begin by
saying that these past five weeks of my life have beenlike no others. My vocation is not a job. It demands my every moment, and my every commitment, but this is especially so these past few weeks. And this on top
of so much recent loss. I have given 15 years now ofmy life to this parish (a quarter of my life), and I washoping to spend the remainder of my years here. I still hope that is possible. Over these years, I have rolled with the punches, & endured intricate/delicate, indeed,often complex situations. I have held my own. But when Fr. Perez died, there was only one person here who would rightfully have pastoral seniority to succeed
him; and, like it or not, that is me. But shortly after Fr. Perez’s death, a lay board rose up asserting its legal authority to appoint the next “pastor” of this parish. Iwant to be clear in stating that (w/o pointing a finger at them) this is Lutheranism pure and simple. Laypeople could never have the ecclesial power or jurisdiction to appoint or create a pastor. That they may have a legal right is not the same as having a divine right. And while there are fine people on this board who engender
my complete respect, the cohesion and leadership of this lay incorporation has been problematic. Nor do I see it being able to work. I did make it clear that I will not serve under another “pastor.” At the same time, I have wanted to facilitate the transition that the church
is undergoing at least through the end of the year. That has been my desire.
I do not take my marching orders from laypeople. And I cannot, as a priest, answer to competing voices on a lay board.
And moreover, as a priest, my credibility, leadership,and moral responsibility could be jeopardized if a
situation not yet addressed in this parish is allowed to continue. My continuous requests for the vetting of
priests serving in this parish have not & are not being met. We have had a couple of “priests” coming through here whose ordination I found questionable
(based on information that later became available), and we have had at least one priest who had no business being here. Yes, mistakes were made (albeit, not on
my part), and we should have learned from them. Five years ago, I proposed to Fr. Perez the following specific requirements of any priest serving in this parish. And they are the following:
1. A criminal background check with ID, performed by a reputable third party, meeting state compliancy.
Also, the background check that I am requesting is not just a clearance check. It must consist of a positive trace of the person’s history.
2. References.
3. A chronological work history.
4. Proof of ordination. And I want to know the ordaining bishop, seminary, and formational contacts. And just for your information, as a Dominican I
underwent thorough background checks and continuous vetting over a period of seven years. And I lived under a virtual microscope 24 hours a day during
that time. Moreover, my background is not hidden. My formation and ordination can be found on the Internet. They are public.
Of note, a request that I made of Fr. Perez last summer got dragged out, & and was never completed. And if I
do not say something now, this situation will never be addressed. Let me ask a question. If you hired someone to work on your house, would you not want
references? Or if you sent your children to a day care center, would you not want references? This is the house of God. Can we be any less responsible?
So here is what I am asking: A priest is a public person. Let me repeat that: A priest is a public person. Therefore, with due respect to all parties involved & a presumption of good will on the part of
all, I am asking that the vetting of Fr. Wiest be completed, and that the results of that vetting process, including proof of ordination be made public. The
problem is that there is no public life of any Fr.Michael Wiest (I know this in part, not just because it cannot be found on the internet, but because I actually had a professional investigator call me one day to inform me of this. He was completely puzzled.) there is no public life of any Fr. Michael Wiest who was
born in Chicago, ordained in Italy, and who served in any parish or diocese during these past 30 or so years.
There is no public record of ministry. There is norecord of pastoral assignments. In short, there is no
such public person. And the fact that there is no such public person does not just amount to an absence of information, it amounts to a fact that demands explanation. It is a problem. And for this reason many in this parish question his ordination. For his own benefit we need to answer this question. And we need to know the credentials of any priest serving in
this parish. That is not asking too much.
Finally, while I do not acknowledge the ecclesial authority of a lay board, if one is to exist, it must be cohesive, charitable, and committed to the principles of the Catholic faith. And if the parishioners of this church are unhappy with this arrangement, perhaps they need to consider another option, perhaps the appointment of a new board which they feel represents
them. But with all due respect, I just do not see this lay board being able to resolve effectively the problems this parish faces, or to find a clear path
forward. And FYI, this lay board represents the interests of the
school (PPA) and not of the church.
===
Additionally, I do know that the board is considering (interviewing) priests who celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. I want to say that it has been our position that this Missal is theologically inadequate (if not modernistic). Fr. Perez vehemently rejected the 1962 Roman Missal. Moreover, it is likely to be problematic to our public celebration of Mass in this
church. May I remind you of some of the problems of this Missal (?):
Revised rite of Holy Week. The famous writer Evelyn Waugh considered the revision of Holy Week to be an extremely disappointing loss. The
introduction of red on Good Friday and Communion of the faithful were arbitrary and capricious, and miss the
fundamental (essential) point of the liturgy (i.e., the Mass of the Pre-Sanctified). It omits Second Confiteor.
It omits numerous octaves, and accordingly significant vigils.
It omits significant feasts, such as January 1: (the Feast of the Circuмcision). The theological
significance: Christ is the fulfillment of the law!
It introduces the Feast of St. Joseph the Worker (as a concession to the tenets of socialism)
It omits Commemorations.
The Passion Narrative during Holy Week is considered to be the Gospel reading. A theological fiction.
Feasts of important saints are haphazardly &arbitrarily moved, making it confusing even to a priest to follow this new ordo.
Feasts of historically momentous saints are suppressed.
St. Joseph is introduced to the Canon. Notably: This is the only change to the Canon since the time of St. Gregory the Great. Why such an introduction? And if
this is admitted, then any change can be made to the Canon of the Mass. And the theological significance: St. Joseph was not a martyr, an exception to the list of those saints who appear in the Canon.
It is inadequate to argue that there are no doctrinal problems with this Missal, as does the SSPX. It is a deviation from the lex orandi, it is theologically
inadequate, & it is misguided in numerous respects.
And even if you believe that the 1962 Roman Missal is okay, how could we serve the needs of this parish in
requiring people to attend daily Mass with two missals, perhaps not knowing which priest is celebrating that
day, not to mention the cost to those with less money?
And finally, finding a priest who observes and understands tradition in the same way as Fr. Perez and myself is a virtually impossible task. You will likely
either encounter a sedevacantist or a modernist (who says: “Yes I celebrate the traditional ‘extraordinary form of the Roman rite’ in Latin.”, as if there could be such thing). So I advise a great note of caution in introducing any priest to this parish.
These are my concerns. You may respond as you see fitting & appropriate. However we proceed going forward, I call for civility & charity, for listening and
understanding, and for a prayerful and thoughtful approach from all parties involved.
Finally, while it is not my custom, I am willing to make a transcript of these words available in a PDF file
for circulation, so that my words are clear for everyone’s understanding, for those who are absent, and for the public record. I do not have the time to
send this out as a response to every email inquiry. But if someone could assist me in making it available, I am
glad to provide a PDF file for circulation.
-
This is one of the dangers with independent chapels; a board of laymen having more power than the Priest and the priest being subject to the board. This isn't to say that all independent chapels are bad, but I'm just pointing out one of the risks.
-
Yes, all independent priests are especially vulnerable to demonic attack.
Speaking from experience, you have a demonic infestation at your chapel. How many times did Fr. Pfeiffer and his minions visit OLHC ?
Bp. (Father) Pfeiffer has targeted your chapel. His Santeria warlock... has targeted your chapel.
Heed my words, you have a malefice (active curse) operating in the chapel. And it's been there for some time.
Father Amorth has lectured on the dangers of malefice and Pfeiferville has been caught red handed practicing it through Santeria.
Your chapel core members needs to embrace spiritual warfare and find and flush out the malefice(s). And an exorcism of the property is appropriate.
-
3 things:
- Thank you, Cera, for posting Fr. Starbucks's sermon.
- situations often make the man, and Fr. Starbuck seems to be rising to the occasion. God bless Fr. Starbuck
- strangely, this is somewhat reminiscent of the actions of the SSPX when "taking over" Our Lady of the Angels after the death of Msgr. Donahue. They introduced "voting" for priests in order to save the parish from Fr. Berry.
-
Holy whack-a-moley. Y'all got some big problems there. I am very sorry. That must be difficult. However, thank-you for posting. I will add that to my list of places to avoid for Mass in future. Yikes. Creepy...
That Priest needs to "disband the board." Period. He is the boss, and if anyone doesn't like what he says, they can leave. IMO. Boot 'em all out. Have 1 or 2 known trustworthy persons to assist in certain matters until alternate arrangements can be made.
Thanks for whomever posted about the connection with Father Pfieffer in KY. I want nothing to do with anything he touches or visits, chapels included. That Priest has gone way off the deep end, and if you ask me, he ain't no Bishop either. (Slang intentional). The inmates are running the asylum. :clown:
-
Yes, all independent priests are especially vulnerable to demonic attack.
Speaking from experience, you have a demonic infestation at your chapel. How many times did Fr. Pfeiffer and his minions visit OLHC ?
Bp. (Father) Pfeiffer has targeted your chapel. His Santeria warlock... has targeted your chapel.
Heed my words, you have a malefice (active curse) operating in the chapel. And it's been there for some time.
Father Amorth has lectured on the dangers of malefice and Pfeiferville has been caught red handed practicing it through Santeria.
Your chapel core members needs to embrace spiritual warfare and find and flush out the malefice(s). And an exorcism of the property is appropriate.
Oops, I accidentally mixed-up two replies and put them in one earlier post, sigh.
-
This is one of the dangers with independent chapels; a board of laymen having more power than the Priest and the priest being subject to the board. This isn't to say that all independent chapels are bad, but I'm just pointing out one of the risks.
Sometimes I think going independent for Priests is one step closer to leaving the Priesthood altogether. I am not saying that is true of all independent Priests, of course, but I know it has been true for some.
Very nice picture of Archbishop Lefebvre for your avatar by the way. He was such a handsome man throughout his life, and he had the most amazing presence about him. I hope he is busy praying for all of us right now, Lord only knows how much we need prayers on this earth!
-
May I suggest that people who know nothing of the beautiful history of this chapel & school refrain from posting about it? They are posting some truths but mixed with their perceptions which most of the time are really not true & a bit twisted. They have no idea what's what or who's who since they've never even been there, yet offer their skewed opinions!! (talk about the height of pride!) This mess/hodgepodge is only adding to the problem & not helping solving the serious problems they now face. Please leave them alone to sort things out & SAY A PRAYER that God's will be done. The board has been there long before Fr. Perez & worked with Fr. Schell so they know the lay of the land. If you've never been there, you know nothing so they don't need your input.
-
Incred, I didn't mean you as what you said is true.
-
Regarding the passing of Fr. Perez at Our Lady Help of Christians in Garden Grove and the subject of who is to be the pastor, we need community pray, fasting and sacrifice begging for God's Will to be done.
I have observed these issues firsthand today and I need to remind all our good people that "A House Divided Will Not Stand" Mark 3:25 - Be advised - God Unites and the Devil Divides
Therefore, I call all parties involved to "Love One Another" especially when being tested because the world will only know we are Christians by how we love one another. Humility is required. Submission to the Will of God is necessary. Pray, Fasting, Sacrifice with Good Independent Spiritual Direction for All parties are recommended for proper discernment. Time is part of the Discernment process.
Our Latin Mass is being challenged in the highest ranks of the Church, from the Vatican itself and it will soon filter down to the local Dioceses by political pressure. The Vatican is requiring that all Tridentine Masses not be held within the parish! This problem makes way for an opportunity at Our Lady Help of Christians, which is an independently operated chapel. It is not a parish. Given its legal status it could be the future home for many Tridentine Catholics, but it must first demonstrate prudence and justice, discipline and trust in God to do the Will of God.
How did the Apostles choose a successor to Judas? They prayed. Remember, Our Catholic Faith Is Not a Democracy! The Majority does not rule in matters of faith.
The question about appointing any priest as a pastor, for or against, must be proceeded by prayer and sacrifice and a charitable, humble spirit in union with the traditions of the Church. God's voice can only be heard as a quiet whisper.
Presently, many I have observed that many parties are upset and have their feelings hurt. Where is Love in the middle of all these strong emotions? Simply speaking if anyone is emotionally compromised, then excellent judgment is lacking. One cannot be very emotional and at the same time detached from worldly concerns in preference for the will of God. Pray, Trust and Faith in God, Surrendering to His Will, that God will handle it. It is a process. Wait prayerfully for God's will to manifest itself. In Christ, Amen.
-
Just wondering how independent chapels generally operate, since it's probably different than the SSPX or Resistance or any chapel overseen by a group of priests.
Do independent chapels generally have laymen choose their priests who will serve the chapel? I'm thinking that this must be the case, unless said chapel is owned by a priest. I'm not against independent chapels at all (I would probably attend an independent chapel if there were one near me). Just wondering how it works.
-
It would seem that Fr Hewko said a Mass yesterday in a hotel in Irvine to some of the faithful from OLHC. Irvine is very close to Garden Grove.
-
I want to say that it has been our position that this Missal is theologically inadequate (if not modernistic). Fr. Perez vehemently rejected the 1962 Roman Missal. Moreover, it is likely to be problematic to our public celebration of Mass in this
church. May I remind you of some of the problems of this Missal (?):
Revised rite of Holy Week. The famous writer Evelyn Waugh considered the revision of Holy Week to be an extremely disappointing loss. The
introduction of red on Good Friday and Communion of the faithful were arbitrary and capricious, and miss the
fundamental (essential) point of the liturgy (i.e., the Mass of the Pre-Sanctified). It omits Second Confiteor.
It omits numerous octaves, and accordingly significant vigils.
It omits significant feasts, such as January 1: (the Feast of the Circuмcision). The theological
significance: Christ is the fulfillment of the law!
It introduces the Feast of St. Joseph the Worker (as a concession to the tenets of socialism)
It omits Commemorations.
The Passion Narrative during Holy Week is considered to be the Gospel reading. A theological fiction.
Feasts of important saints are haphazardly &arbitrarily moved, making it confusing even to a priest to follow this new ordo.
Feasts of historically momentous saints are suppressed.
St. Joseph is introduced to the Canon. Notably: This is the only change to the Canon since the time of St. Gregory the Great. Why such an introduction? And if
this is admitted, then any change can be made to the Canon of the Mass. And the theological significance: St. Joseph was not a martyr, an exception to the list of those saints who appear in the Canon.
It is inadequate to argue that there are no doctrinal problems with this Missal, as does the SSPX. It is a deviation from the lex orandi, it is theologically
inadequate, & it is misguided in numerous respects.
Sounds like the problem is not the 1962 missal but every missal after the Holy Week changes of Pius XII in like 1955, no?
-
Sounds like the problem is not the 1962 missal but every missal after the Holy Week changes of Pius XII in like 1955, no?
Go to the 18:50 mark. All the priests at OLHC hold this position.
https://youtu.be/9MSEq6Xp7sE
-
Just wondering how independent chapels generally operate, since it's probably different than the SSPX or Resistance or any chapel overseen by a group of priests.
Do independent chapels generally have laymen choose their priests who will serve the chapel? I'm thinking that this must be the case, unless said chapel is owned by a priest. I'm not against independent chapels at all (I would probably attend an independent chapel if there were one near me). Just wondering how it works.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the center of our lives as Catholics. The holy priests who bring heaven to earth are of the utmost importance to Catholics. The understanding of most of us at OLHC was that Father Starbuck, having served faithfully for 15 years, would simply pick up when Father Perez left us.
Many of us hoped he would solve many of the problems we have had with "priests" who are not actually priests such as "Father" Colletti (pedophile who had been laicized and who was not to say Mass in public) and "Father" Wiest (see Father Starbuck's sermon in the OP for details) and "Father" Croisette who attended the quick-study "seminary" at Pfiefferville.
The school board members are puffed up regarding their own importance, but they are actually irrelevant. They first floated a story about a 2014 "docuмent" that Father Perez purportedly signed. Then that narrative disappeared and was replaced with a 2021 "docuмent" purportedly signed by a very ill Father Perez and "witnessed" by -- wait for it -- two members of the school board. This supposed docuмent gave the school board the power to morph into a Protestant-style Church Board (something Father Perez would never sign.)
As an earlier poster said, Father Starbuck should just take over. (Easier said than done when dealing with those who so lust after power and money that they are willing to bang on the door of the confessional to DEMAND that Father Starbuck not give the sermon they didn't like.)
These people have taken it upon themselves to run the school, but that does NOT mean that they get to appoint themselves as a Protestant-style church board with the power to run the chapel, take charge of all donations, cut Father Starbuck off from any Mass donations, and attempt to get rid of him to put Pfieffer and/or Wiest in charge.
As Incred pointed out earlier, this battle is spiritual. Please pray for Father Starbuck to be guided and protected by Our Lord and Our Lady.
-
Lay boards are common for any property that isn't owned by a priest or his group. They existed before Vatican 2 as well. They aren't intrinsically problematic, and the idea that they are protestant is an ignorant idea.
But like any issue of governance, corruption can be an issue. It sounds like it is here, and that's unfortunate.
-
Lay boards are common for any property that isn't owned by a priest or his group. They existed before Vatican 2 as well. They aren't intrinsically problematic, and the idea that they are protestant is an ignorant idea.
But like any issue of governance, corruption can be an issue. It sounds like it is here, and that's unfortunate.
The difference here is that no such chapel board exists.
What does exist is a school board engaging in overreach at best and corruption at worst.
-
Thank you Cera for posting this. I fell in love with OLHC until I learned things about "Father" Wiest in this forum and I could not stay there with those questions about his validity and it troubled me that Fr. Perez would allow him to stay. I'm blown away that some people not only ignore the discrepancies from "Father" Wiest but to do what seems to be an endorsement.
I witnessed a mass by Father Starbuck and I am convinced of his commitment to his priesthood and the protection of tradition. I am proud of him for speaking up. I just can't go back to OLHC on a regular basis knowing that the issues Father Starbuck brought up are still not resolved.
-
Incred, I didn't mean you as what you said is true.
No, you were obviously referring to the possibility of only 3 other posters, including me. Hi there (waving). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that a lady, Cera, had posted a sermon here to a *publicly readable forum board*, and therefore airing the chapel's dirty laundry in public, if you will. So it is no surprise that there will be comments made to such a board. But it seems she is a member of that chapel and very upset at things. And rightfully so.
****Did the lady have permission to publicly post this sermon? Hmmm...perhaps in prudence the Priest was planning to repeat the same sermon at a later Mass, but did not want it made public, and that's a possible explanation for why his later Mass was not live-streamed. Did you consider that possibility? I am guessing you did not.****
Why did she post? Was it to gain empathy? Was she trying to merely share information? Problem solve? It seems to me it is a combination of all of those things, but should she have posted the sermon in the first place? Only she can answer that question. You cannot.
You don't know who goes to Mass there and who doesn't (I am quite certain it would have visitors at times), and perhaps I may know some of those visitors? Or not? It makes no difference. I am pretty sure that I could find acquaintances that have been there. Have I been to that chapel? How would you know one way or the other? You won't. Perhaps I have been considering travel?
I indicated that I mixed up two of my replies to two different posters, and combined them into one reply. It was too late to modify them. However, NO, I want nothing to do with any sketchy situations that remotely involve Father J. Pfeiffer from Kentucky and his own little world there. Creepy...
I don't have to attend OLHC TO SIDE WITH THE PRIEST! I don't need to hear any soothing words from you or rude accusations telling me it's "Pride" to have common sense to come up with this, when anyone with a few functioning neurons and a basic understanding of authority could say the same thing about siding with the Priest.
If OLHC has people that do not respect the authority of the current Priest? Then buh-bye, off they go now. They don't deserve to have a chapel if THEY are setting themselves above the Priest, alone or on any Governing Board. That's how I see it. Go ahead and throw all the rocks you want at me. CA is a rich state, and it's expensive to live there. Real estate is a prime target to acquire. Whoever owns the land and/or has the deeds/titles, is in charge, for better or for worse. There is a reason why it used to be common for chapels and churches, etc. would not be consecrated until the mortgage was paid and the title or deed secured, or to that effect.
If docuмents were signed by the Priest that died when he was sick, were they signed "under duress?" A lawyer would quickly dismiss things like this if there was any doubt he was not competent to sign in his condition. So I am guessing there will be lots of legal fun for that chapel coming up.
There is an easy solution to the problem that hasn't been mentioned yet, but I am waiting for someone else to figure it out. The current Priest needs to call in all keys/codes/access cards for the property, and reset/re-key everything.
And in case you haven't figure it out yet? I am on the side of the Priest. He needs to carry the authority. If he is not in charge of that chapel, then it is not me you need to be talking to about pride!
Cera, I am sorry that your chapel is in distress, and that you and others are, too. Cheers, Anne.
-
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the center of our lives as Catholics. The holy priests who bring heaven to earth are of the utmost importance to Catholics. The understanding of most of us at OLHC was that Father Starbuck, having served faithfully for 15 years, would simply pick up when Father Perez left us.
Many of us hoped he would solve many of the problems we have had with "priests" who are not actually priests such as "Father" Colletti (pedophile who had been laicized and who was not to say Mass in public) and "Father" Wiest (see Father Starbuck's sermon in the OP for details) and "Father" Croisette who attended the quick-study "seminary" at Pfiefferville.
The school board members are puffed up regarding their own importance, but they are actually irrelevant. They first floated a story about a 2014 "docuмent" that Father Perez purportedly signed. Then that narrative disappeared and was replaced with a 2021 "docuмent" purportedly signed by a very ill Father Perez and "witnessed" by -- wait for it -- two members of the school board. This supposed docuмent gave the school board the power to morph into a Protestant-style Church Board (something Father Perez would never sign.)
As an earlier poster said, Father Starbuck should just take over. (Easier said than done when dealing with those who so lust after power and money that they are willing to bang on the door of the confessional to DEMAND that Father Starbuck not give the sermon they didn't like.)
These people have taken it upon themselves to run the school, but that does NOT mean that they get to appoint themselves as a Protestant-style church board with the power to run the chapel, take charge of all donations, cut Father Starbuck off from any Mass donations, and attempt to get rid of him to put Pfieffer and/or Wiest in charge.
As Incred pointed out earlier, this battle is spiritual. Please pray for Father Starbuck to be guided and protected by Our Lord and Our Lady.
Thanks - I appreciate the explanation.
-
Lay boards are common for any property that isn't owned by a priest or his group. They existed before Vatican 2 as well. They aren't intrinsically problematic, and the idea that they are protestant is an ignorant idea.
But like any issue of governance, corruption can be an issue. It sounds like it is here, and that's unfortunate.
Bingo.
-
****Did the lady have permission to publicly post this sermon? Hmmm...perhaps in prudence the Priest was planning to repeat the same sermon at a later Mass, but did not want it made public, and that's a possible explanation for why his later Mass was not live-streamed. Did you consider that possibility? I am guessing you did not.****
Why did she post? Was it to gain empathy? Was she trying to merely share information? Problem solve? It seems to me it is a combination of all of those things, but should she have posted the sermon in the first place? Only she can answer that question. You cannot.
Hi Anne,
Thank you for your thoughtful post. I thought the answer to your question was clear in the OP; maybe it was not I realize that it was a long one and difficult to read because Father Starbuck has failing eyesight and uses huge print Father Starbuck requested that his sermon be publicized in the preface to his email to me and others.
I am willing to make a transcript of these words available in a PDF file
for circulation, so that my words are clear for everyone’s understanding, for those who are absent, and for the public record. I do not have the time to
send this out as a response to every email inquiry. But if someone could assist me in making it available, I am
glad to provide a PDF file for circulation.
-
the OP is misinformed regarding the parish and how it was formed and who controls it..
Ive been attending for over a decade and know the families who built this parish very well..
its very dangerous and damaging to cast shade on the parish to outside parties when you may not have all the facts.
(people are already leaving regarding some of the falsehoods being spread around)
the Board has always been in control of the school, and the church, OLHC just rented the space from them out of the tithes.
MSGR Perez specifically instructed FR Starbuck NOT be made the pastor in the event of his death.
To say that the board is attempting to "take control" of the parish is just wrong.. they were given the NPO OLHC by MSGR Perez.
To call them protestants and Usurpers for merely following the will of MSGR is very uncharitable and basically uninformed gossip.
-
These posts are mildly interesting and mostly uninformed. A few questions:
Cera - so can we presume that you actually saw the 2014 or 2021 docuмents from Msgr. Perez? Can we presume that you can identify the board members who were the witnesses? Can we presume that you are personally aware of the date of the 2021 docuмent and that you can verify that it was signed either when Msgr. Perez was incapacitated or under duress? Can we presume that Msgr. Perez discussed all of this with you? If no, to any of the above, then you are guessing - and you're probably guessing incorrectly. Of course, if you have evidence to support your allegation . . .
Who actually owns the land on which the chapel sits? This should be easy because it's a matter of public record. If the chapel doesn't own the land, doesn't that belie any inference of a power grab for control of the land?
Cera and Anne - How is OLHC organized? What is it? Who organized it? When? What are the "legal requirements"? Would Msgr. Perez be aware of that? Is his name on any of the legal papers? Why do you claim there is/was no board? Is that even possible? Or is OLHC just an imaginary nothing - no entity - just a name? Again - this is also a matter of public record that anyone can look up. California Secretary of State - business entity search - would be a good place to start.
Just G - I thought the Arcadia (SSPC/FR. Berry) situation was played out in the court with both sides being fully "lawyered up" (the record shows that both sides had quality legal counsel), and the judge ultimately decided the successor based on the facts presented at the trial. In fact, my recollection is that the legal issues lasted for quite some time. Wasn't there some evidence on which the court based its decision?
Thorn - good points.
Again, lots of misinformation and supposition floating on this thread. It's ok to desire an outcome - it's not ok to slander others in the process (see the 8th Commandment).
-
the OP is misinformed regarding the parish
The OP is Father Starbuck's sermon from yesterday; he asked that his sermon be publicized (especially since a school board member banged on the door of his confessional and demanded that he not give the sermon at the 10 am Mass. He had already given the sermon at the 7:30 am Mass.) He also asked that his sermon be publicized because evil forces prevented the 10 am Mass from live-streaming as it always is.
Father Starbuck has been faithfully serving us at OLHC for 15 years.
If anyone is misinformed regarding the "parish" it is you my friend and the power-hungry and money-hungry school board members attempting to put themselves above the priest who has served us faithfully.
-
power and money hungery? the npo was given to them by MSGR.. its his wishes that FR starbuck not be the pastor.. yet you cast them as usurpers and power hungry protestants.. but you.. and this sermon ignore all of those very important points
its absurd
-
Cera - so can we presume that you actually saw the 2014 or 2021 docuмents from Msgr. Perez? Can we presume that you can identify the board members who were the witnesses? Can we presume that you are personally aware of the date of the 2021 docuмent and that you can verify that it was signed either when Msgr. Perez was incapacitated or under duress?
I see that you just registered today and this is your very first post. Interesting. Are you an interested insider? An interested outsider? Or perhaps a member of the school board on a fishing expedition?
If you were a member of OLHC, you should be aware that Our Lady Help of Christians had a website through which Father Starbuck could inform us of the death of Father Perez and continue to update us on funeral arrangements, upcoming Masses, confessions etc. During this time he was doing the work of three priests.
I say had, because unfortunately, that website was high-jacked by the school board members in order to silence Father Starbuck and sell their power-grabbing narrative. This is their latest post:
http://www.ourladyhelpofchristians.us/
Monsignor Perez provided docuмentation near the time of his March, 2021, surgery, that in the event of his death, (1) all Parish (OLHC) property would be transferred to the authority of the Board of Trustees of Padre Pio Academy, who would also, (2) be solely responsible for the timely choice of a new pastor.
. . .Your checks should still be made payable to “OLHC” or “Our Lady Help of Christians”, deposited in the collection at Sunday Mass or mailed ONLY to: Our Lady Help of Christians 9621 Bixby Ave Garden Grove, CA 92841 *** OLHC priests are unable to accept new Mass Intention Requests at this time ***
http://www.ourladyhelpofchristians.us/
Long story short, these lay persons on the school board are claiming to have a docuмent which
1. "proves" that they have the right to select a new priest (and the right to tell Father Starbuck who has faithfully served the chapel for 15 years to pack his bags)
2. "proves" that they the school board have now inherited the church $$$$ property
3. deprives Father Starbuck of meager funds he receives for saying Masses
-
im a concerned parish member who is shocked by the outright lies being circulated here.
I joined to talk about your misinformed post specifically...
your conspiracy theories about a false letter are just as misinformed as the rest of your proclamations.
-
power and money hungery? the npo was given to them by MSGR.. its his wishes that FR starbuck not be the pastor.. yet you cast them as usurpers and power hungry protestants.. but you.. and this sermon ignore all of those very important points
its absurd
Did Fr. Perez stipulate as to what should be done to provide a pastor for the chapel, if not Fr. Starbuck? What did Fr. Perez specifically say about finding a pastor for the chapel? Surely he must have said something about this, if he was interested in providing for his flock in the event of his death.
Not that it's really any of my business, but the situation has been made public here, so I thought I'd ask what seems like relevant questions.
-
the OP is misinformed regarding the parish and how it was formed and who controls it..
Ive been attending for over a decade and know the families who built this parish very well..
its very dangerous and damaging to cast shade on the parish to outside parties when you may not have all the facts.
(people are already leaving regarding some of the falsehoods being spread around)
the Board has always been in control of the school, and the church, OLHC just rented the space from them out of the tithes.
MSGR Perez specifically instructed FR Starbuck NOT be made the pastor in the event of his death.
To say that the board is attempting to "take control" of the parish is just wrong.. they were given the NPO OLHC by MSGR Perez.
To call them protestants and Usurpers for merely following the will of MSGR is very uncharitable and basically uninformed gossip.
It all sounds very protestant to me.
I don’t know any of the characters mentioned herein, but it is certainly not the Catholic way. Besides a parish is a division within a diocese. What diocese do you belong to? How can a priest rule on his successor? What a disaster!
-
I dont know what the details were in terms of finding a new pastor..
however I know the letter is real, because FR. Starbuck saw it, and due to that instructed the keys to the website be handed over to the board..
it wasnt stolen in order to silence him..
-
I dont know what the details were in terms of finding a new pastor..
however I know the letter is real, because FR. Starbuck saw it, and due to that instructed the keys to the website be handed over to the board..
it wasnt stolen in order to silence him..
What you say conflicts with what Father Starbuck said in his sermon Sunday (which is posted in the OP of this thread.)
-
thats whats so troubling for me about the sermon.. its leaves this out.. but I know first hand this is the truth..
-
he admits in a round about way here that the board has the legal authority to appoint the next pastor.. and thats because MSGR. left the NPO OLHC to them.. and instructed them to not make FR Starbuck the pastor.
"That they may have a legal right is not the same as having a divine right. "
If MSGR would have given the NPO to FR. Starbuck he would be the pastor.. but it was not his wish..
I find it odd and a bit bewildering that the board is being called Lutherens for following the dying wishes of their Long time Pastor Msgr Perez.
-
I see that you (Catholic25) just registered today and this is your very first post. Interesting. Are you an interested insider? An interested outsider? Or perhaps a member of the school board on a fishing expedition?
Don't mean to derail this thread, but as Catholic25 only has one post with one down thumb, where did he get a reputation of TEN thumbs up?
-
Incred, I didn't mean you as what you said is true.
No problem!
-
Cera posted about me: "I see that you just registered today and this is your very first post. Interesting. Are you an interested insider? An interested outsider? Or perhaps a member of the school board on a fishing expedition?"
Given that the nature of my comments were "factual" questions and not naked allegations (BTW - in situations like this, I don't ask questions such as the ones I posted unless I know - as a matter of fact - the answers), and the nature of your posts are accusatory, the better question is "who are you and what is your agenda"? I know the answers to all of the questions I raised. If anyone wants to do a little internet research, they can also find out some "truth" about OLHC and the property. If they want to do a little more research, they can find out the truth about the Arcadia situation. I also know the "true" answer to many of the naked, unsubstantiated allegations you have foisted on this thread. And no, I did not just register today. If you click on my "name" and read my profile, you will see that I registered in 2016. Apparently, my thumbs down is from someone on this thread that doesn't agree with me or the questions I raised. Perhaps the 10 thumbs up are from posts several years ago when I did participate in this site. However, I tired of this as a royal waste of time, I am not in the habit of gossiping, and don't find these boards particularly worthy of any serious attention. General lack of accurate information. I don't need message boards like these to spew inane thoughts anonymously to an audience trying to convince the "court of public opinion" that things should be viewed my way. But I also detest misinformation.
Obviously, the sermon you printed speaks for itself. It doesn't mean that it is 100% accurate. In fact, it contains a bit of opinion. It's certainly short on doctrine or catechesis.
And no, I am not on the board of PPA or OLHC.
-
I am new to the forum. Although not a parishioner at OLHC, I have attended Mass there several times and knew the late Fr. Perez. God rest his soul. I understand the dire situation in the Church right now and sympathize with the efforts of independent priests to protect their flock from the ravages of Modernism. The things that concern me here are the questions surrounding Fr. Wiest's ordination and his entire history as a priest. There are two other threads here that have discussed this in detail. This topic is not gossip per se. The public history of a priest is a topic that anyone can legitimately inquire about. The where, when, and who of a priest's ordination is public knowledge and in this particular case, from what I've seen, there is little or nothing that is available.
Fr. Starbuck discussed this in his sermon printed above. I'm not trying to "pile on" anyone here. Fr. Wiest is recovering from a horrible case of Covid, and prayers are appropriate for his continued healing. There is, however, a growing controversy over the particulars of his priestly history and the need is real for an explanation. There have been men throughout the ages who have pretended to be priests, it's not unheard of. You're either validly ordained, or you're not. If there are so many questions here, they need to be answered. Everything should be "above board" when it comes to the background of a priest.
-
I am new to the forum. Although not a parishioner at OLHC, I have attended Mass there several times and knew the late Fr. Perez. God rest his soul. I understand the dire situation in the Church right now and sympathize with the efforts of independent priests to protect their flock from the ravages of Modernism. The things that concern me here are the questions surrounding Fr. Wiest's ordination and his entire history as a priest. There are two other threads here that have discussed this in detail. This topic is not gossip per se. The public history of a priest is a topic that anyone can legitimately inquire about. The where, when, and who of a priest's ordination is public knowledge and in this particular case, from what I've seen, there is little or nothing that is available.
Fr. Starbuck discussed this in his sermon printed above. I'm not trying to "pile on" anyone here. Fr. Wiest is recovering from a horrible case of Covid, and prayers are appropriate for his continued healing. There is, however, a growing controversy over the particulars of his priestly history and the need is real for an explanation. There have been men throughout the ages who have pretended to be priests, it's not unheard of. You're either validly ordained, or you're not. If there are so many questions here, they need to be answered. Everything should be "above board" when it comes to the background of a priest.
first off I'd just like to say : I feel for Fr. Starbucks position, and think he should have been left as the pastor as well, 15 years is along time, and I cant imagine how much it hurt to be passed over for this position.. I dont know why Msgr decided against this, but I know Fr. Starbuck asked Msgr to be appointed as the head in case of his death or incapacitation a few times while he was alive, and Msgr refused to do it then, and this aligns with the letter.
And
I agree with this aspect of Fr. Starbucks sermon along with doing backround checks on all Priests invited to help serve the chapel. I was referring mainly to the contention that the board is protestant usurpers... Perhaps I should have included my agreement with this aspect.. but it seemed like a side point to the main post.
-
The things that concern me here are the questions surrounding Fr. Wiest's ordination and his entire history as a priest. There are two other threads here that have discussed this in detail. This topic is not gossip per se. The public history of a priest is a topic that anyone can legitimately inquire about. The where, when, and who of a priest's ordination is public knowledge and in this particular case, from what I've seen, there is little or nothing that is available.
I agree and the unknowns of Fr. Wiest along with the questions already covered in other threads are the reason I have not gone back to OLHC, except for Fr. Perez's Requiem mass said by Fr. Starbuck.
-
I've been coming to this Chapel for many years, and have given much in financial support. And I can say, without a shadow of a doubt, that this is all about money. Many top contributors have left, therefore, a financial gap has formed. The Chapel has grown very much, ever since Covid, but these new parishioners give very little, when compared to the ones that have left.
I left for many reasons, but the straw that broke the camels back, was Fr. Perez's death. I asked myself many questions, and this warning given by Fr. Starbuck only solidified my conclusion.
Fr. Perez not only died of Covid, but also of sadness. He was not a Monsignor, but was in fact cheated, out of a sum of money, for this title, by a fake Bishop. And he had a really hard time admitting this, especially to himself.
Another thing that gave him grief, was this whole Fr. Wiest scandal. Fr. Wiest claims to have met with Fr. Perez in Italy, but when asked about this, Fr. Perez said, he could not remember. Well this is when some of the top contributors started to leave or withhold their support. And around this time is when the Chapel started to ask for more money.
See, before Fr. Wiest, there was Fr. Colletti, which ended up burning not only OLHC but Fr. Perez as well. This situation was very embarrassing for the Chapel, due to the fact that the Bishop of Orange, Van, sent a warning letter to one of the parishioners about Colletti, from there word spread throughout the Chapel, but not from Fr. Perez nor OLHC. So what did they do, they lied, and said, that he got called back to the Diocese of Chicago. At the time I reasoned it away by telling myself everyone makes mistakes, as did many families. Still, some families left, and obviously others never forgot. But looking back, that was a very poor decision, not only on OLHC, but Fr. Perez as a Pastor.
Next, Fr. Sretenovic. This Priest was at OLHC for many years. And one day to the next gone. What were the parishioners told, first, that he went on vacation, and next, that he left for another mission. Well all that was a lie. He had a falling out with Fr. Perez & left, and that was the truth. And I thought to myself, people have disagreements and venture off on their own all the time, but why lie about it? Again I reasoned it away.
Their was also the fact that Fr. Perez said, that the SSPX was in error, but at the same time, he would send his catechumens for conformation to their Bishops. He also claimed other stuff that was just not true, and all for the sake of not losing anymore contributors to other Latin Masses said in the area, SSPX, S. John Baptist, Our Lady by the Sea, etc.
Finally, the death of Fr. Perez. Why did God take Fr. Perez, the way that he did? It's obvious, a chastisement. Fr. Perez was preaching from the pulpit that Covid was no big deal, and that horse dewormer & large doses of ibuprofen could cure you. Mind you weeks before his death, and a few months after a few parishioners died from Covid. I saw God's hand in that.
Fr. Perez's mission was complete, he showed the authentic Catholic faith to whom he needed to show it to. But as a Pastor, put in charge of a flock, to protect it, he failed; albeit he was guiding it to the right direction.
So, it's plain to see, that Fr. Starbuck is in fact Ordained by God to lead OLHC. I would say that he is insipid, but Saint Paul says: to put up with it a bit, and to be patient, for it behooves you. Fr. Starbuck is in the right, and he has 100% my support.
If this Chapel is to survive, then a new group of Elders, needs to be elected by the men of the congregation, who have no ties to the school. They must be kept separate.
This current “board”, who are they? What are their motivations? Who is the secretary? Who is the treasurer? How much money came into the Chapel? Who knows? All I've been told these past few years was that the original Priest, Fr Schell, gave the land to some families he trusted. And I never questioned it, up until now.
And to the people saying, Fr. Perez's dying wish was, that Fr. Starbuck never be made the Pastor, as Saint Paul saith, they are full of shit. Even if he did say it, no Pope, nor Bishop, even less a Priest, can order a certain person, not to become Pope, or Bishop, or Priest. Never been heard of it.
-
I share some of these concerns ernie.
but it seems youre not aware of what the board is or how the board actually functions.
The school board IS the chapel board, they never were separate. why would they be now?
The letter is real. Fr. Starbuck acknowledged it himself..
for whatever reason Msgr. didnt think Fr. Starbuck was right for the position.
as much as some of us may not agree with it. thats the reality.
-
Why did God take Fr. Perez, the way that he did? It's obvious, a chastisement. Fr. Perez was preaching from the pulpit that Covid was no big deal, and that horse dewormer & large doses of ibuprofen could cure you. Mind you weeks before his death, and a few months after a few parishioners died from Covid. I saw God's hand in that.
Turn off CNN. "horse dewormer" or rather Ivermectin is a proven remedy against whatever "COVID" is.
I suppose you took the clot shot, the Fauci ouchie, and wear a mask as well?
:facepalm:
-
Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine have been proven to be effective if given early on after symptoms develop, but not so much if the patient goes downhill. Vitamin D, Zinc, and other drugs may help too in preventing serious symptoms. The trouble is, most doctors will not prescribe these therapeutics.
Dr. Peter McCullough has said there is a concerted effort by the medical establishment and governments worldwide to suppress the use of therapeutics in favor of a dogmatic insistence on universal 'vaccines'. There's something sinister afoot with this relentless push for experimental vaccines, which are really gene treatments using mRNA to generate untold numbers of spike proteins in our bodies. And now thousands of "fully vaccinated" people are coming down with the virus. So, more boosters are needed! And the beat goes on, and on, and on...
-
Fr. Starbuck is in the right, and he has 100% my support.
. . . And to the people saying, Fr. Perez's dying wish was, that Fr. Starbuck never be made the Pastor, as Saint Paul saith, they are full of shit. Even if he did say it, no Pope, nor Bishop, even less a Priest, can order a certain person, not to become Pope, or Bishop, or Priest. Never been heard of it.
Thank you Ernie for a truthful post. Several of those weighing in on this issue are brand new posters on CathInfo who sound like they are school board members.
If they are not school board members (or a certain spouse of a school board member) it's odd that they continue to repeat the lying narrative of the school board (posted on the hijacked OLHC website and re-posted on this thread) about a so-called letter which gives them authority to get rid of our good priest and faithful servant of 15 years, Father Starbuck.
Those of us who are ordinary chapel members and not part of the school board's grab for money and power are certain Father Perez would have wanted and expected Father Starbuck to take over for him. Since Father Starbuck is older, Father Perez would have no reason to expect to die first and therefore did not put into writing his expectation that Father Starbuck would take over.
Let us all pray for the truth to come out and their plans against Father Starbuck to fail.
-
I share some of these concerns ernie.
but it seems youre not aware of what the board is or how the board actually functions.
The school board IS the chapel board, they never were separate. why would they be now?
The letter is real. Fr. Starbuck acknowledged it himself..
for whatever reason Msgr. didnt think Fr. Starbuck was right for the position.
as much as some of us may not agree with it. thats the reality.
It is a lie to conflate the existing school board with a non-existing "chapel board."
No such board exists.
It is a lie to say that Father Starbuck acknowledged the letter is real.
You and the school board are the only one spreading that lie.
It is a lie to say Father Perez didn't want Father Starbuck to follow him.
Again, you and the school board are the only one spreading that lie.
Repeating falsehoods over and over again does not make them come true.
Calumny against a good priest who has served our chapel faithfully for 15 years is a serious matter.
-
It is a lie to conflate the existing school board with a non-existing "chapel board."
No such board exists.
It is a lie to say that Father Starbuck acknowledged the letter is real.
You and the school board are the only one spreading that lie.
It is a lie to say Father Perez didn't want Father Starbuck to follow him.
Again, you and the school board are the only one spreading that lie.
Repeating falsehoods over and over again does not make them come true.
Calumny against a good priest who has served our chapel faithfully for 15 years is a serious matter.
I'm not trying to cause trouble in asking this, and I am not affiliated with the chapel, but do you believe that there was no letter in which it is was stipulated that Fr. Starbuck not take over in the event of Fr. Perez' death? The opposition seem quite adamant that there is a letter.
-
All I can say is -- what a mess.
Glad I don't live near that chapel. It sounds like there's more scandal, intrigue, and politics going on at that chapel than prayer!
Hard pass.
-
cara is passing lies, and putting people off from the chapel.. not sure if shes doing this knowingly or not but its wrong.
she thinks she knows more then the people who actually put in work there..
have you even cleaned 1 bathroom at the chapel the whole time youve been attending here cara?
the board is made of family members who put their blood sweat tears and money into the chapel waaay before Fr. Perez was even there..
they control the whole property.. the fact that you dont know this should make everyone second guess any of the "facts" youre pushing here.
I am not on the board, or related to anyone on the board...
I am the web developer who was posting updates for Fr. Starbuck.. Fr. Starbuck instructed me to turn the website over to the board as they were the rightful owners per the letter...
its laughable you think you know more then everyone else.. and everyone else who disagrees with you must be a money hungry lutherite...
your uncharitable gossip isnt a good look for anyone.
youre scandalizing people. please stop damaging this Chapel with your misinformation.
thanks.
-
It's a mess because dealing with the affairs of someone who has died, and the subsequent hereafter is very messy. I've heard stories from an attorney I knew.
-
yeah its very hard..
no one asked for this..
-
I am the web developer who was posting updates for Fr. Starbuck..
The name of the web developer is known and what she says is the opposite of what you are saying.
-
LOL... wow...
clearly youre just a liar whos agenda is more important then the truth at this point..
the web dev who was assisting FR starbuck was a man.. I know because its me..
I built and ran the website OLHC.us for 10 years..
everyone whos a real parishioner whos been going there for sometime and is knowledgeable about the community knows who I am.
the web dev I handed it off too is also a male...
youre dark.
-
I'm not trying to cause trouble in asking this, and I am not affiliated with the chapel, but do you believe that there was no letter in which it is was stipulated that Fr. Starbuck not take over in the event of Fr. Perez' death? The opposition seem quite adamant that there is a letter.
A docuмent exists. What is in dispute is whether it is legitimate or not.
Those who knew Father Perez know that he wanted LESS power for the school board.
It would have been out of character for him to sign any docuмent giving all financial control and the control to select the next priest to the school board.
It would have been out of character for Fr. Perez to give the school board the power to dispose of Fr. Starbuck. If that had been his intent, he would have done so himself, not do it from the grave.
The first story that was being peddled (after the untimely death of Fr. Perez) was that Fr. Perez had written such a docuмent in 2014. Most people in the chapel have heard this story.
The next version was that Fr. Perez had written such a docuмent in 2021, at the time of his surgery.
No one knows if it is his actual signature or not.
If it is his actual signature, as an earlier poster asked, was he under duress?
If it was it signed, was it signed when he was in excruciating pain prior to the surgery?
If it was signed, was it signed when he came out of surgery and was sedated?
If it was signed, wouldn't he have given a copy to Father Starbuck?
Was it actually signed by him at all?
Motive and opportunity.
-
from day 1 its been known the letter was written before he had his surgery..
youve been exposed as a liar..
just stop.
-
Well, once more I'm going to have to come on here & correct a few personal opinions.
1. Ernie1965ray - in your post you said they need a 'new group of Elders'. What religion do you belong to, to refer to the board as Elders? Strange. Then you post that the men of the congregation need to vote. Why can't the women vote as well? The congregation should vote.
2. Someone posted that Perez died as a chastisement for 'preaching against Covid' or was it the vaccine? I'm too busy to go back & see. Fr. Perez died as a chastisement but it wasn't about anything as worldly as Covid or the vaccine. I believe that Fr. Perez grossly neglected his priestly duty by allowing a pedophile who could no longer function even as a NO priest to say Mass on their altar & also allowed another man, Weist, with not an ounce of verification that he was a priest, to also say Mass! Someone more knowledgeable in theology correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't all these a sacrilege of the highest order? Then he allowed the Pfeifferville 'priest' to also say Mass there. GOD WILL NOT BE MOCKED.
3. Fr. Perez paid money to become a Msgr?! Then when he found out he really wasn't a Msgr, he continued to use the title! Some of his followers call him Msgr too.
4. Fr. Starbuck may have been at OLHC 15 years, but the first 10 + or - years he had health problems & never did any public functions as a priest as far as I know. There must be a reason why Fr. Perez didn't want him as the pastor.
5. Fr Stretenovic left as he didn't like the way Fr. Perez treated people & he was asked to take over a Mission in another state. I never heard of all those other reasons - going on vacation, etc.
6. As far as I know neither of those priests have been conditionally ordained, have they?
Yes, indeed, this is a mess.
-
The board can do whatever it wants. It's their land and building. Just don't lie anymore. That's my biggest hang up being lied to my face. Will not be coming back, going to SSPX in Colton. Good luck God bless
-
i feel the same way.. people can disagree, but at least lets be truthful about the facts.
agendas help no one.
best of luck to you and God Bless u as well..
-
Hey Thorn,
I really didn't want to post a reply but you talk like someone who's been at the chapel for a while because most of your posts are right on the money. I know because I've been there since Fr. Schell said Mass at a middle school auditorium on Dale. I was there when we purchased the property and worked tirelessly to make it what it is today. It is sad to me that everyone involved can't see past their own ego that this is the devil's handy work, and that they need to come together to save Fr. Schell's dream.
I know this much. Fr. Perez despised Fr. Starbuck, hence the reason why he wasn't put in charge. God took Fr. Perez for a reason and perhaps it was because OLHC needed a change in directions with Fr. Starbuck leading it. I don't know for sure. However, I do believe it was wrong of Fr. Perez to leave this ministry to a board of directors made up of laypeople. That's what Protestants do.
I do hope that the board and Fr. Starbuck can find a way forward and keep this parish from falling into pieces. Let's all pray to God and ask for his mercy and divine grace upon our little chapel.
-
This is so crazy. Stay away from these independent chapels.
-
If the SSPX Resistance was real, Bp. Zendejas would have assisted OLHOC.
He conditionally ordained Father Sretenovich.
Now he’s running solo based out of a lady doctor’s home.
I guess that what Bp. Williamson meant when he said tradition could not be centrally organized (or the Jєωs would infiltrate it).
Now the only missionary apostolate left to fill the priestly void is crazy Bp. Pfeiffer, with his Santeria warlock operations manager.
They will gladly help OLHOC pick up the pieces.
:facepalm:
-
All this news about the chapel is so distressing and disturbing. A major spiritual battle is going on there it seems. Many prayers for every person of good will associated with OLHC and for Fr. Starbuck, a good priest. That is all...
-
Cera, you posted that it would be 'out of character' for Fr. Perez to sign any docuмent giving all financial control & the control to select the next priest to the school board. That makes no sense since the board members are the founding fathers of the school & church! Fr. Perez came much later in the game, so of course it would be the board who would choose the successor of Fr. Perez. People had complaints about him from day one.
Common Sense - I've been at the chapel so maybe you know me. I know much, much more than what I've posted but don't want to reveal too much as I want to remain anonymous & peaceful.
-
Hey Thorn,
I really didn't want to post a reply but you talk like someone who's been at the chapel for a while because most of your posts are right on the money. I know because I've been there since Fr. Schell said Mass at a middle school auditorium on Dale. I was there when we purchased the property and worked tirelessly to make it what it is today. It is sad to me that everyone involved can't see past their own ego that this is the devil's handy work, and that they need to come together to save Fr. Schell's dream.
I know this much. Fr. Perez despised Fr. Starbuck, hence the reason why he wasn't put in charge. God took Fr. Perez for a reason and perhaps it was because OLHC needed a change in directions with Fr. Starbuck leading it. I don't know for sure. However, I do believe it was wrong of Fr. Perez to leave this ministry to a board of directors made up of laypeople. That's what Protestants do.
I do hope that the board and Fr. Starbuck can find a way forward and keep this parish from falling into pieces. Let's all pray to God and ask for his mercy and divine grace upon our little chapel.
Wow, just wow.
Sweetie, there's some humble pie being served in a cafeteria somewhere.
I am beginning to think a lot of the problems there are because of the parishioners there, and not any of the Priests. Maybe the poor Priest had a heart-attack from the stress of dealing with parishioners like you?
How about you all STOP discussing your Parish/chapel problems on this forum? How about you all discuss them in person, and in private?
Yes, California, the land of fruits and nuts, of all kinds, including the tough-to-crack-been-around-forever-ones. I don't think I have read such a bunch of twat like your comments for a long time.
Here is my opinion, from an outsider that can perhaps see things a bit more objectively. You don't deserve a chapel if this is how you talk about your Priests. Period. Remember this when the door closes.
Merry Christmas, Anne.
-
The board can do whatever it wants. It's their land and building. Just don't lie anymore. That's my biggest hang up being lied to my face. Will not be coming back, going to SSPX in Colton. Good luck God bless
The board can do whatever it wants. It's their land and building. Just don't lie anymore. That's my biggest hang up being lied to my face. Will not be coming back, going to SSPX in Colton. Good luck God bless
Applause, applause. I don't know how much it will increase your inconvenience factor if any, sir, but I believe your peace of mind and soul will be increased. You are a wise man to leave indeed. Applause. I am sure a caravan will follow along in your footsteps before long. Or for your sake, hopefully maybe not. I hope you find the peace of mind and soul you seek.
God bless you, and Merry Christmas, Anne.
P.S. Excuse the format issue. In a hurry and it will not delete for some reason. As I tried to indicate in one of my earlier posts, "Follow the money." (ESPECIALLY in places like CA). I had my own run-in with a chapel down there. Cuckoo! I refused to engage in their in-fighting and such, and told them to stuff it. They had to close one of their little projects and drive their kids elsewhere. It served them right.
I also refused another proposal from them. "Oh, but I could rent this out and make x dollars right now!" Then go for it. I wasn't going to engage with a bunch of money whores throwing the bills around, "Catholic" or not. Like I said, "Follow the money." It works every time...
-
I spoke with Fr. Starbuck this morning, he says he has not been shown any letter, I assumed he had since he told me to hand the keys of the website over to the board, he said assumed the board owned the site and thats why he instructed me in that way..
just want to post what I know to be the truth from what ive seen / have been told by all involved parties.. if any of my knowledge about the situation changes I will post about it.
yes lots of prayer needed.. I agree with common sense.. we all just need to come together and meet in the middle to work this out for the best of everyones souls and Fr. Shells legacy.
-
How about you all STOP discussing your Parish/chapel problems on this forum? How about you all discuss them in person, and in private?
YES!!! This ^^^
-
I spoke with Fr. Starbuck this morning, he says he has not been shown any letter, I assumed he had since he told me to hand the keys of the website over to the board, he said assumed the board owned the site and thats why he instructed me in that way..
just want to post what I know to be the truth from what ive seen / have been told by all involved parties.. if any of my knowledge about the situation changes I will post about it.
yes lots of prayer needed.. I agree with common sense.. we all just need to come together and meet in the middle to work this out for the best of everyones souls and Fr. Shells legacy.
Yes. Thank you for your clarification. I also spoke to him this morning and he told me he had not seen any such letter. He has great humility, which is why he deferred to the SCHOOL board. I do not believe he assumed the SCHOOL board "owned" the CHURCH website; he just deferred to them out of his humility.
Several chapel members are starting a 54-day Novena asking Our Lady of the Rosary to protect and guide Father Starbuck and to rid the chapel of evil. The official start date is Jan. 1; however some of us have already begun.
As you say "we all just need to come together and meet in the middle to work this out for the best of everyones souls and Fr. Shells legacy." Amen.
God bless you and have a Blessed Christmas.
Here is info on the Novena.
Here are the simple instructions:
https://www.childrenofmary.net/what-is-the-54-day-rosary-novena/ (https://www.childrenofmary.net/what-is-the-54-day-rosary-novena/)
Here is a version with additional prayers.
https://www.ourholycross.org/blog/2021/4/30/pray-to-our-lady-of-pompeii (https://www.ourholycross.org/blog/2021/4/30/pray-to-our-lady-of-pompeii)
-
I am praying for you guys. We went to an independent chapel with problems about getting a priest. Too much unholy drama.
-
...
Merry Christmas, Anne.
Blessed Advent.
-
The usurpers on the OLHC school board have now told Father Starbuck that they are putting him on on “vacation” and they will not permit him to say the Midnight Mass, nor any Christmas Masses.
Defintion of Usurpers: 1. To seize and hold by force or without legal authority.
Please pray the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for the evil at the chapel to be rooted out and for protection and guidance for Father Starbuck.
As you probably know, the first 27 days are petition and the following 27 days are in thanksgiving (whether or not the petition appears to have been granted). The official start date was to have been January 1, but many of us have already begun.
If you decide to pray for Father Starbuck, please write him a note and let him know. His address is on (or used to be on the chapel bulletin), but if you don’t have it handy, it’s P.O. Box 427, Tustin CA 92781
Here is an explantion of the 54-day Rosary:
Whoever desires to obtain favors from Me should make three novenas of the prayers of the Rosary, and three novenas in thanksgiving. – Promise of Our Lady of the Most Holy Rosary
On March 3, 1884 (in the same year Pope Leo XIII wrote the prayer to St. Michael, and exactly 33 years before the Fatima apparitions), a young girl named Fortuna Agrelli was graced with an apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary and given this special devotion, which she passed onto others.
At the time, young Fortuna was ill with 3 separate incurable diseases and her doctors had given up on her case saying it was hopeless. In desperation, the young girl and her family began a novena of Rosaries.
Our Lady appeared to the girl, sitting upon a high throne, surrounded by luminous figures, holding the Divine Child on Her lap, and in Her hand a Rosary.
The sick girl greeted the Blessed Virgin with the following words: “Queen of the Holy Rosary, be gracious to me, restore me to health! I have already prayed to Thee in a novena, O Mary, but have not yet experienced Thy aid. I am so anxious to be cured!”
“Child,” responded the Blessed Virgin, “you have invoked Me by various titles and have always obtained favors from Me. Now, since you have called Me by that title so pleasing to Me, Queen of the Most Holy Rosary, I can no longer refuse the favor you petition; for this name is most precious and dear to Me. Make three novenas, and you shall obtain all.”
Once more, the Queen of the Holy Rosary appeared to the young girl and said, “Whoever desires to obtain favors from Me should make three novenas of the prayers of the Rosary, and three novenas in thanksgiving.”
Obeying Our Lady’s instructions, the young girl was healed and restored to perfect health.
54-DAY ROSARY NOVENA
Traditionally a novena is nine days. Thus, Our Lady’s words to young Fortuna, “make three novenas of the prayers of the Rosary in petition, and three novenas in thanksgiving.”
The novena consists of five decades of the Rosary (one set of mysteries) each day for twenty-seven days in petition; then immediately five decades each day for an additional twenty-seven days in thanksgiving, regardless of whether or not the request has been granted yet.
So began six novenas of Rosaries, which became known as the 54-day Rosary Novena.
To do the novena properly one must pray the Rosary for 54 consecutive days, without missing a day, and must pray the particular Mystery indicated for that day following the correct sequence.
That is, the first day of the novena always begins with the Joyful Mysteries (regardless of what day of the week the novena is started); the second day, the Sorrowful Mysteries are prayed; and the third day of the novena, the Glorious Mysteries are prayed.
The fourth day of the novena begins again with the Joyful Mysteries and continues on in that sequence throughout the 54 days of the novena.
THE MIRACULOUS ROSARY NOVENA
It has been reported that the miracle of young Fortuna’s cure upon praying the 54-day Rosary Novena, made a deep impression on Pope Leo XIII. He wrote 17 encyclicals on the Rosary and urged all Christians to love the Rosary and pray it fervently.
-
I'm a long-time parish member of OLHC for over 10 years.
The "Layperson" who violently banged on the door of the confessional while Father was hearing confessions is none other than the usher at the 7:30 a.m. named "Joel." I don't remember his last name. After interrupting Father DURING CONFESSION, "Joel" fiercely told Father words to the effect of "YOU ARE NOT TO GIVE THAT SERMON AT THE NEXT MASS! I know that Father was terrorized by this psychological "assault."* Father actually felt threatened and extremely fearful by this individual's brutal aggression against him. "Joel" also ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit before the 10:00 a.m. Mass so Father would not be able to give this sermon (contained within). Bravely, Father gave it anyway.
Assault Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assault)
"Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist [or violently banging on the door of a confessional while a priest is hearing confession] might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result.
This man dispecable individual "Joel" must be held accountable for his abusive and in my opinion near criminal act he perpetrated against Father Starbuck!
Father is a gentle, Christ-like, charitable, loving, giving, true traditional Priest who has given his heart & soul for 15 years of his life at OLHC.
I ask those who have had the honor having knowing Father and have received the graces and wisdom of his confessions and most Holy Masses WRITE AND SPEAK UP HERE ON THIS FORUM and tell the world (and his evil detractors) what a great holy priest Father Starbuck is!!
-
Yes. Thank you for your clarification. I also spoke to him this morning and he told me he had not seen any such letter. He has great humility, which is why he deferred to the SCHOOL board. I do not believe he assumed the SCHOOL board "owned" the CHURCH website; he just deferred to them out of his humility.
he told me over the phone that he did the day that I posted this. which may have been a mistaken belief.
its not just the school board, its the board for the entire property which also happens to run the school.
much prayer is needed 100%.
Please Jesus show us the way.
I believe this will all get resolved properly if we come at it with humility, prayer, and
-
How many people who are registered at this chapel?
-
We had a gentlemen usher at the independent Thuc chapel we went to was cussing and threatening to beat up the priest during Mass. My husband had to jump up and protect the elderly priest. One family who was a generous benefactor left. We left. Shortly after this, the man’s wife died. Others who gave the priest a hard time died.
They would never treat a sodomite priest that way.
-
I'm a long-time parish member of OLHC for over 10 years.
The "Layperson" who violently banged on the door of the confessional while Father was hearing confessions is none other than the usher at the 7:30 a.m. named "Joel." I don't remember his last name. After interrupting Father DURING CONFESSION, "Joel" fiercely told Father words to the effect of "YOU ARE NOT TO GIVE THAT SERMON AT THE NEXT MASS! I know that Father was terrorized by this psychological "assault."* Father actually felt threatened and extremely fearful by this individual's brutal aggression against him. "Joel" also ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit before the 10:00 a.m. Mass so Father would not be able to give this sermon (contained within). Bravely, Father gave it anyway.
Assault Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assault)
"Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist [or violently banging on the door of a confessional while a priest is hearing confession] might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result.
for it to be an assault he wouldve had to threaten to harm him, which doesnt seem to be the case here? or do some overt act such as raising a fist to them in a threatening manner. making the other party believe an attack would be imminent with the reasonable ability to carry it out in the moment.
even saying something like "the next time I see you im going to beat you up.." doesnt rise to the level of assault.
It generally comes down to reasonableness... would a reasonable person believe that joel was about to physically assault Fr. Starbuck?
not trying to take sides on this, but thats typically the standard for assault.
-
I read the sermon to my husband. He said Father Starbuck talks with sense. Priests should be checked out. Maybe they should do a criminal background check on the board members.
That is weird that there is no info about a priest associated with the chapel. There is a school there and children need to be protected.
What is Father Hewko doing in California?? Is that true??
-
I'm a long-time parish member of OLHC for over 10 years.
The "Layperson" who violently banged on the door of the confessional while Father was hearing confessions is none other than the usher at the 7:30 a.m. named "Joel." I don't remember his last name. After interrupting Father DURING CONFESSION, "Joel" fiercely told Father words to the effect of "YOU ARE NOT TO GIVE THAT SERMON AT THE NEXT MASS! I know that Father was terrorized by this psychological "assault."* Father actually felt threatened and extremely fearful by this individual's brutal aggression against him. "Joel" also ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit before the 10:00 a.m. Mass so Father would not be able to give this sermon (contained within). Bravely, Father gave it anyway.
Assault Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assault)
"Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist [or violently banging on the door of a confessional while a priest is hearing confession] might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result.
This man dispecable individual "Joel" must be held accountable for his abusive and in my opinion near criminal act he perpetrated against Father Starbuck!
Father is a gentle, Christ-like, charitable, loving, giving, true traditional Priest who has given his heart & soul for 15 years of his life at OLHC.
I ask those who have had the honor having knowing Father and have received the graces and wisdom of his confessions and most Holy Masses WRITE AND SPEAK UP HERE ON THIS FORUM and tell the world (and his evil detractors) what a great holy priest Father Starbuck is!!
Amen. The individual you mention is a member of the SCHOOL board, which advises the school, NOT the chapel. Please join us in praying the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for the intention the rot be removed from the chapel and that Father Starbuck will be protected and guided by Our Lady.
-
Any school board member who acts violent and hateful in Church shouldn’t be involved in any Catholic school.
Children are sponges. They know what is going on. They hear the gossip.
-
Who is the priest who they want for Midnight Mass?
-
Any school board member who acts violent and hateful in Church shouldn’t be involved in any Catholic school.
Children are sponges. They know what is going on. They hear the gossip.
Have a blessed Advent and Merry Christmas.
-
for it to be an assault he wouldve had to threaten to harm him, which doesnt seem to be the case here?
I think that whether the action constitutes an assault or not, it does not diminish the severity and disrespect of those actions towards the Priest.
I do not think the Priest will feel safe around this person from now on. If that was the reaction in front of everyone I've be afraid of what he might do when nobody is around.
-
What is Joel's last name?
-
The posts here are sad. Gossip, calumny, and detraction. Pure and simple. Even things that could be known for certain with a little research - aren't. Too much trouble to find out what's real. What is O L H C? Who "owns" it? Who owns the property? Who are the persons with authority? All matters of public record. But, facts don't matter when "charity" (or, in the case of this thread, anti-charity) are concerned. Congratulations to those who are trying to infuse some truth and fact into the discussion. Shame on those who are simply "alleging" stuff because it fits their agenda. I think I just saw this movie - thrice. All three featured blowhards trumpeting an agenda. One show focused on someone named Rittenhouse, another on someone named Smollette, and a third on someone named Sandmann. Of course the blowhards had all of the "facts" (until they were proven wrong). Deja Vu all over again.
Merry Christmas - and don't forget that the Confessionals will be open.
-
for it to be an assault he wouldve had to threaten to harm him, which doesnt seem to be the case here? or do some overt act such as raising a fist to them in a threatening manner. making the other party believe an attack would be imminent with the reasonable ability to carry it out in the moment.
even saying something like "the next time I see you im going to beat you up.." doesnt rise to the level of assault.
It generally comes down to reasonableness... would a reasonable person believe that joel was about to physically assault Fr. Starbuck?
not trying to take sides on this, but thats typically the standard for assault.
You need to read again the post you are commenting on.
The "Layperson" who violently banged on the door of the confessional while Father was hearing confessions is none other than the usher at the 7:30 a.m. named "Joel." I don't remember his last name. After interrupting Father DURING CONFESSION, "Joel" fiercely told Father words to the effect of "YOU ARE NOT TO GIVE THAT SERMON AT THE NEXT MASS! I know that Father was terrorized by this psychological "assault."* Father actually felt threatened and extremely fearful by this individual's brutal aggression against him. "Joel" also ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit before the 10:00 a.m. Mass so Father would not be able to give this sermon (contained within). Bravely, Father gave it anyway.
Note the word psychological.
So you don't take sides when a priest is disturbed by violent action while dispensing a Sacrament of the Church?
When a person "ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit"?
When this terrorist demands what a priest can or can't say from the pulpit.
I wouldn't make light of such behaviour against the person of a priest. I'd be inclined to call such behaviour sacrilegeous.
-
Indeed Nadir well said:
"So you don't take sides when a priest is disturbed by violent action while dispensing a Sacrament of the Church?
When a person "ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit"?
When this terrorist demands what a priest can or can't say from the pulpit."
This name of the "usher" who brutally confronted Father at the 7:30 a.m. Mass last Sunday is "JOEL IDDINGS!"
Sources in the parish have now informed me that this individual has now ordered Father Starbuck to not come on church property attempting to say the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass at all this Christmas weekend! In addition, if Father were to come on the property of OLHC, Father is warned that he would then be arrested for trespassing!
This after this great priest has given his heart & soul to this parish for 15 years! Am I the only one who believes that there is something seriously wrong here?
-
Why is everyone posting that Fr. Starbuck has given 15 years to OLHC? What was he doing for the first 10 years or so? He just started saying Mass a few years ago.
-
Reply to "Thorn"
You wrote:
"Why is everyone posting that Fr. Starbuck has given 15 years to OLHC? What was he doing for the first 10 years or so? He just started saying Mass a few years ago."
You are not telling the truth! You lie! Have YOU been here for 15 years? You wrote: "He started saying the Mass a few years ago." This is an Absolute Lie! Apart from the time that Father was indeed periodically ill for a couple of years the most, Father has been saying Mass, hearing confessions and serving OLHC for 15 years!!
I know! I actually have been a member of OLHC for 15 years not the 10 years I originally posted. I invite any other long time member of OLHC to corroborate my statement of Father's presence here for 15 years!
-
Just wondering how independent chapels generally operate, since it's probably different than the SSPX or Resistance or any chapel overseen by a group of priests.
Do independent chapels generally have laymen choose their priests who will serve the chapel? I'm thinking that this must be the case, unless said chapel is owned by a priest. I'm not against independent chapels at all (I would probably attend an independent chapel if there were one near me). Just wondering how it works.
Yes, laymen choose the priests. Sometimes they make very unholy choices.
-
SupportFrStarbuck - I actually support Fr. Starbuck, but the truth is when he came he had health problems that kept him incapacitated - that wasn't his fault. He's only started saying Mass recently. Why are you so nasty about this? It's the truth.
-
P.S I was a member when Fr. Starbuck came & was even there years before. The fact that he had health problems doesn't detract from his being a good & humble priest. He only started saying the Mass recently. That's a fact. No wonder OLHC is having serious problems with nasty people like you. btw - was Fr. conditionally ordained? Calm down, Support!
-
Reply to "Thorn"
You wrote:
"Why is everyone posting that Fr. Starbuck has given 15 years to OLHC? What was he doing for the first 10 years or so? He just started saying Mass a few years ago."
You are not telling the truth! You lie! Have YOU been here for 15 years? You wrote: "He started saying the Mass a few years ago." This is an Absolute Lie! Apart from the time that Father was indeed periodically ill for a couple of years the most, Father has been saying Mass, hearing confessions and serving OLHC for 15 years!!
I know! I actually have been a member of OLHC for 15 years not the 10 years I originally posted. I invite any other long time member of OLHC to corroborate my statement of Father's presence here for 15 years!
You are 100% correct. I've been at the chapel since the 1990s. Father Starbuck was healthy when he arrived, and as you say was ill for less than 2 years, then he fully resumed his service to (what used to be) our chapel. During the time Father Starbuck was ill, he offered his suffering up to Our Lord for the good of the chapel. Those who are Catholic know that such suffering is also service to God.
This is spiritual warfare.
Please pray the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary that the rot will be removed from the chapel and for the protection and guidance of Father Starbuck. Please write him a note to let him know you are praying for him.
-
Why was today's live-streamed 10 a.m. Mass blacked out? Below is the sermon given by Father Starbuck at the 7:30 Mass. He also gave it at the 10 a.m. Mass which was to be live-streamed on You Tube.
However, a layperson attempting to take over the chapel banged on the confessional door and demanded that Father Starbuck "desist" from repeating this sermon.
Father did give the sermon, however for unexplained reasons, the sermon was not videotaped and live-streamed as the 10 a.m. Mass always is. Here is the sermon that the laypersons attempting to take over the chapel do not want you to see.
19 December 2021
Sunday
I had a sermon prepared for this morning. However,there are some matters of business that do not allow ofdeferral. Therefore, I will present that sermon at a later time.
I have always tried to be truthful and to do the rightthing. And sometimes I have paid a price for that. Butplease know this about me: I will always try to be
honest with you and to fulfill my commitment to youas a public servant and as a priest. I want to begin by
saying that these past five weeks of my life have beenlike no others. My vocation is not a job. It demands my every moment, and my every commitment, but this is especially so these past few weeks. And this on top
of so much recent loss. I have given 15 years now ofmy life to this parish (a quarter of my life), and I washoping to spend the remainder of my years here. I still hope that is possible. Over these years, I have rolled with the punches, & endured intricate/delicate, indeed,often complex situations. I have held my own. But when Fr. Perez died, there was only one person here who would rightfully have pastoral seniority to succeed
him; and, like it or not, that is me. But shortly after Fr. Perez’s death, a lay board rose up asserting its legal authority to appoint the next “pastor” of this parish. Iwant to be clear in stating that (w/o pointing a finger at them) this is Lutheranism pure and simple. Laypeople could never have the ecclesial power or jurisdiction to appoint or create a pastor. That they may have a legal right is not the same as having a divine right. And while there are fine people on this board who engender
my complete respect, the cohesion and leadership of this lay incorporation has been problematic. Nor do I see it being able to work. I did make it clear that I will not serve under another “pastor.” At the same time, I have wanted to facilitate the transition that the church
is undergoing at least through the end of the year. That has been my desire.
I do not take my marching orders from laypeople. And I cannot, as a priest, answer to competing voices on a lay board.
And moreover, as a priest, my credibility, leadership,and moral responsibility could be jeopardized if a
situation not yet addressed in this parish is allowed to continue. My continuous requests for the vetting of
priests serving in this parish have not & are not being met. We have had a couple of “priests” coming through here whose ordination I found questionable
(based on information that later became available), and we have had at least one priest who had no business being here. Yes, mistakes were made (albeit, not on
my part), and we should have learned from them. Five years ago, I proposed to Fr. Perez the following specific requirements of any priest serving in this parish. And they are the following:
1. A criminal background check with ID, performed by a reputable third party, meeting state compliancy.
Also, the background check that I am requesting is not just a clearance check. It must consist of a positive trace of the person’s history.
2. References.
3. A chronological work history.
4. Proof of ordination. And I want to know the ordaining bishop, seminary, and formational contacts. And just for your information, as a Dominican I
underwent thorough background checks and continuous vetting over a period of seven years. And I lived under a virtual microscope 24 hours a day during
that time. Moreover, my background is not hidden. My formation and ordination can be found on the Internet. They are public.
Of note, a request that I made of Fr. Perez last summer got dragged out, & and was never completed. And if I
do not say something now, this situation will never be addressed. Let me ask a question. If you hired someone to work on your house, would you not want
references? Or if you sent your children to a day care center, would you not want references? This is the house of God. Can we be any less responsible?
So here is what I am asking: A priest is a public person. Let me repeat that: A priest is a public person. Therefore, with due respect to all parties involved & a presumption of good will on the part of
all, I am asking that the vetting of Fr. Wiest be completed, and that the results of that vetting process, including proof of ordination be made public. The
problem is that there is no public life of any Fr.Michael Wiest (I know this in part, not just because it cannot be found on the internet, but because I actually had a professional investigator call me one day to inform me of this. He was completely puzzled.) there is no public life of any Fr. Michael Wiest who was
born in Chicago, ordained in Italy, and who served in any parish or diocese during these past 30 or so years.
There is no public record of ministry. There is norecord of pastoral assignments. In short, there is no
such public person. And the fact that there is no such public person does not just amount to an absence of information, it amounts to a fact that demands explanation. It is a problem. And for this reason many in this parish question his ordination. For his own benefit we need to answer this question. And we need to know the credentials of any priest serving in
this parish. That is not asking too much.
Finally, while I do not acknowledge the ecclesial authority of a lay board, if one is to exist, it must be cohesive, charitable, and committed to the principles of the Catholic faith. And if the parishioners of this church are unhappy with this arrangement, perhaps they need to consider another option, perhaps the appointment of a new board which they feel represents
them. But with all due respect, I just do not see this lay board being able to resolve effectively the problems this parish faces, or to find a clear path
forward. And FYI, this lay board represents the interests of the
school (PPA) and not of the church.
===
Additionally, I do know that the board is considering (interviewing) priests who celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. I want to say that it has been our position that this Missal is theologically inadequate (if not modernistic). Fr. Perez vehemently rejected the 1962 Roman Missal. Moreover, it is likely to be problematic to our public celebration of Mass in this
church. May I remind you of some of the problems of this Missal (?):
Revised rite of Holy Week. The famous writer Evelyn Waugh considered the revision of Holy Week to be an extremely disappointing loss. The
introduction of red on Good Friday and Communion of the faithful were arbitrary and capricious, and miss the
fundamental (essential) point of the liturgy (i.e., the Mass of the Pre-Sanctified). It omits Second Confiteor.
It omits numerous octaves, and accordingly significant vigils.
It omits significant feasts, such as January 1: (the Feast of the Circuмcision). The theological
significance: Christ is the fulfillment of the law!
It introduces the Feast of St. Joseph the Worker (as a concession to the tenets of socialism)
It omits Commemorations.
The Passion Narrative during Holy Week is considered to be the Gospel reading. A theological fiction.
Feasts of important saints are haphazardly &arbitrarily moved, making it confusing even to a priest to follow this new ordo.
Feasts of historically momentous saints are suppressed.
St. Joseph is introduced to the Canon. Notably: This is the only change to the Canon since the time of St. Gregory the Great. Why such an introduction? And if
this is admitted, then any change can be made to the Canon of the Mass. And the theological significance: St. Joseph was not a martyr, an exception to the list of those saints who appear in the Canon.
It is inadequate to argue that there are no doctrinal problems with this Missal, as does the SSPX. It is a deviation from the lex orandi, it is theologically
inadequate, & it is misguided in numerous respects.
And even if you believe that the 1962 Roman Missal is okay, how could we serve the needs of this parish in
requiring people to attend daily Mass with two missals, perhaps not knowing which priest is celebrating that
day, not to mention the cost to those with less money?
And finally, finding a priest who observes and understands tradition in the same way as Fr. Perez and myself is a virtually impossible task. You will likely
either encounter a sedevacantist or a modernist (who says: “Yes I celebrate the traditional ‘extraordinary form of the Roman rite’ in Latin.”, as if there could be such thing). So I advise a great note of caution in introducing any priest to this parish.
These are my concerns. You may respond as you see fitting & appropriate. However we proceed going forward, I call for civility & charity, for listening and
understanding, and for a prayerful and thoughtful approach from all parties involved.
Finally, while it is not my custom, I am willing to make a transcript of these words available in a PDF file
for circulation, so that my words are clear for everyone’s understanding, for those who are absent, and for the public record. I do not have the time to
send this out as a response to every email inquiry. But if someone could assist me in making it available, I am
glad to provide a PDF file for circulation.
This ^ is font size 2, not font size 7, as in post #1. This is achieved by merely using Preview and adjusting the font before you press "Post." The font size option is located in the second capital A within the formatting options above the message field, with an up-and-down red arrow to its left. (The first capital A is the font face or lettering style.)
Thank you.
-
This ^ is font size 2, not font size 7, as in post #1. This is achieved by merely using Preview and adjusting the font before you press "Post." The font size option is located in the second capital A within the formatting options above the message field, with an up-and-down red arrow to its left. (The first capital A is the font face or lettering style.)
Thank you.
I hit thumbs up. I meant to click quote.
I have several times copied something and pasted and reduced the size of the text only to have it revert to the original size when I posted. I then tried modifying it a couple of times and it still reverts to the original size. It doesn't always work with copy and paste, only with what you type.
-
Blessed Advent.
Thank-you, sorry I missed replying to you. To you also, John. I posted Merry Christmas in the event I am not on this forum on Christmas Day. I figured most people here knew it was still Advent, by the way.
-
You are 100% correct. I've been at the chapel since the 1990s. Father Starbuck was healthy when he arrived, and as you say was ill for less than 2 years, then he fully resumed his service to (what used to be) our chapel. During the time Father Starbuck was ill, he offered his suffering up to Our Lord for the good of the chapel. Those who are Catholic know that such suffering is also service to God.
This is spiritual warfare.
Please pray the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary that the rot will be removed from the chapel and for the protection and guidance of Father Starbuck. Please write him a note to let him know you are praying for him.
I am randomly posting my reply here because I am really fed-up with reading about all the Priest dissing, and all the supposed insiders trying to explain things on here, and hurl mud at each other, on once again, a PUBLICLY READABLE forum board.
Your chapel has BIG problems. HUGE. Ladies, this is mostly for you, but not exclusively.
My husband and I were on our way to do a Holy Hour last night and for confessions (there must have been over 60 people in line, so Father must have ended up spending 2 or more hours in the confessional). Anyway, I mentioned to my husband as were driving in, (we have a long drive), "So, I am on this Catholic forum." "Yeah, what about it?" "Well, what would you say or think about people posting about the problems in their parish and talking about the Priests?"
"They shouldn't be posting anything about their parish. If there are problems, then they need to be discussing things in private and in a boardroom somewhere, and not on some forum." "That's what I thought, and I posted that." "Why, who is posting? Oh let me guess. Is it women posting?" "Yes, mostly."
"You know, in all my years of doing X and running X, I have had the most problems with women. They were always the ones trying to tell the Priests what to do, criticizing them, stirring up trouble in the parish, stirring up trouble for those going to Mass. They could be so nasty." "Hmmm..." "That's one reason why I shudder when the phone rings and I worry it's A or B. They never stopped criticizing the Priests." "So what should I do to try to stop things?"
"They are posting this stuff on a public forum where anybody can read it? Well, they could find themselves in hot water or legal trouble." "They have named names and are accusing people of different things." "Like I said, they could find themselves in hot water or legal trouble. Are any men posting things?" "Not as much." "Figures. Just stay away and be glad you don't have to go there or deal with them."
-
This ^ is font size 2, not font size 7, as in post #1. This is achieved by merely using Preview and adjusting the font before you press "Post." The font size option is located in the second capital A within the formatting options above the message field, with an up-and-down red arrow to its left. (The first capital A is the font face or lettering style.)
Thank you.
Thank you Magdala, I sent it on just as I received it from Father Starbuck. I should have changed the font.
The main point here is that we all need to be praying for Father Starbuck.
Better yet, join us in saying the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for the rot to be removed from the chapel and for the protection and guidance of Father Starbuck.
That seems to be one thing we should all be able to agree on.
-
I'm a long-time parish member of OLHC for over 10 years.
The "Layperson" who violently banged on the door of the confessional while Father was hearing confessions is none other than the usher at the 7:30 a.m. named "Joel." I don't remember his last name. After interrupting Father DURING CONFESSION, "Joel" fiercely told Father words to the effect of "YOU ARE NOT TO GIVE THAT SERMON AT THE NEXT MASS! I know that Father was terrorized by this psychological "assault."* Father actually felt threatened and extremely fearful by this individual's brutal aggression against him. "Joel" also ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit before the 10:00 a.m. Mass so Father would not be able to give this sermon (contained within). Bravely, Father gave it anyway.
Oh, how I'd love to take Joel out to the parking lot.... and beat his ass :fryingpan:
St. Nicholas beater of heretics, please intercede for it to happen.
-
:incense:
-
Yes, all independent priests are especially vulnerable to demonic attack.
Speaking from experience, you have a demonic infestation at your chapel. How many times did Fr. Pfeiffer and his minions visit OLHC ?
Bp. (Father) Pfeiffer has targeted your chapel. His Santeria warlock... has targeted your chapel.
Heed my words, you have a malefice (active curse) operating in the chapel. And it's been there for some time.
Father Amorth has lectured on the dangers of malefice and Pfeiferville has been caught red handed practicing it through Santeria.
Your chapel core members needs to embrace spiritual warfare and find and flush out the malefice(s). And an exorcism of the property is appropriate.
Ann
-
Oh, how I'd love to take Joel out to the parking lot.... and beat his ass :fryingpan:
St. Nicholas beater of heretics, please intercede for it to happen.
Where we are, any person banging on any confessional door had better be yelling something like, "fire" or "parishioner is down and doesn't have a pulse and is dying on the floor," or something similar. Otherwise, they are in serious need of help. But I am not saying what kind.
If anyone tried to attack a Priest here? I would physically go after them myself. The guy wouldn't walk straight again. I would not think twice about it, or defending the Blessed Sacrament. I would also find some way to rip the tabernacle off the wall in a fire or die trying.
-
I am randomly posting my reply here because I am really fed-up with reading about all the Priest dissing, and all the supposed insiders trying to explain things on here, and hurl mud at each other, on once again, a PUBLICLY READABLE forum board.
Your chapel has BIG problems. HUGE. Ladies, this is mostly for you, but not exclusively.
My husband and I were on our way to do a Holy Hour last night and for confessions (there must have been over 60 people in line, so Father must have ended up spending 2 or more hours in the confessional). Anyway, I mentioned to my husband as were driving in, (we have a long drive), "So, I am on this Catholic forum." "Yeah, what about it?" "Well, what would you say or think about people posting about the problems in their parish and talking about the Priests?"
"They shouldn't be posting anything about their parish. If there are problems, then they need to be discussing things in private and in a boardroom somewhere, and not on some forum." "That's what I thought, and I posted that." "Why, who is posting? Oh let me guess. Is it women posting?" "Yes, mostly."
"You know, in all my years of doing X and running X, I have had the most problems with women. They were always the ones trying to tell the Priests what to do, criticizing them, stirring up trouble in the parish, stirring up trouble for those going to Mass. They could be so nasty." "Hmmm..." "That's one reason why I shudder when the phone rings and I worry it's A or B. They never stopped criticizing the Priests." "So what should I do to try to stop things?"
"They are posting this stuff on a public forum where anybody can read it? Well, they could find themselves in hot water or legal trouble." "They have named names and are accusing people of different things." "Like I said, they could find themselves in hot water or legal trouble. Are any men posting things?" "Not as much." "Figures. Just stay away and be glad you don't have to go there or deal with them."
At this point SIXTEEN MEN have posted as opposed to TEN WOMEN including you.
I guess as an obedient wife you will be following your husband's direction and we won't be hearing from you again.
MERRY CHRISTMAS
-
At this point SIXTEEN MEN have posted as opposed to TEN WOMEN including you.
I guess as an obedient wife you will be following your husband's direction and we won't be hearing from you again.
MERRY CHRISTMAS
:laugh1:
-
At this point SIXTEEN MEN have posted as opposed to TEN WOMEN including you.
I guess as an obedient wife you will be following your husband's direction and we won't be hearing from you again.
MERRY CHRISTMAS
At this point SIXTEEN MEN have posted as opposed to TEN WOMEN including you.
I guess as an obedient wife you will be following your husband's direction and we won't be hearing from you again.
MERRY CHRISTMAS
Thanks, and a Merry Christmas to you also :-) It's unfortunate that you still don't see what is going on. IF you attend that chapel, you are contributing to the problem, period. If you don't attend that chapel? Then shouldn't you be baking cookies or something? If you can dish it out, then you should be able to take it. Oui?
My husband's point was mostly about women that stir up the pot. Legally you could be getting into big trouble. But keep going there Betty Crocker, you and your gal-pals (and yes, some of the men) are doing a bang-up job. He was trying to warn from experience, but has no dog in the fight. He feels sorry for all of you. And excuse me if I didn't count the actual number of men versus women. Small potatoes when the principle remains the same.
This is one reason why I cannot stand working with women, just sayin.' I will take a male boss any day, (unless I am the boss, which I have been). Being on any parish committee, women's group, or board with women is migraine-inducing. Two women is fine, anymore than that is time for Alka-Seltzer.
We were considering joining a certain parish once. I went around and around listening to a group of ladies that were arguing about how to cut brownies for a funeral reception. One lady was mad that I was wearing "her apron," (without a name on it), that had been handed to me by another lady "in charge." (I hate aprons, but wore it out of courtesy). They then proceeded to argue about slicing the buns, and how much the butter should be melted. They wanted me to join their group. "No thanks, I would rather wash my car." The best part of that women's group is the husband of one of the ladies that makes wicked perogies. YUM!
I have been surrounded with men the majority of my life, have worked a variety of highly skilled fields with huge responsibilities and have been appreciated for being able to do a job well and without a lot of trouble. I saved a man's life two weeks into a traditionally male-dominated field. He was ever so grateful. I had the respect of every man on that crew from day one or two. I wasn't sitting around on my butt wasting time or talking about getting my nails done. But that's nice once in awhile, too.
Lives depended on my position. Cattiness, gossip, and "Mrs. knows-what-she-said-he-said" would end up DEAD on the job because they would be too busy yakking and the machinery would be in their path. As just one detail of many, I was running hundreds of dump-trucks a day in and out/on a massive project. I was constantly bothered by a jealous female. Some of the attitudes here remind me of working with them in another field.
If you have problems in your chapel, then people need to stop posting names, discussing the Priests, and otherwise discussing it. You may find yourself in the centre of a lawsuit or two by your helpfulness. There are things called libel and slander and defamation of character, etc. Those things are very real. It would be a terrible thing to receive a legal letter for Christmas because people that go to Mass there don't know when to leave well enough alone and a number of people are sued. And if the Priest can't easily call 9-11 or needs a panic button, then one should be provided for him.
I lurked for almost 2 years on this board, and thought maybe it might be nice to actually sign up. I mentioned it to my husband and he said, "I hope it turns out to be a nice thing for you." "Well, they do have a private women's group, but I probably won't fit in there either. Not interested in discussing baby wipes or spit-up, and I could care less about knitting or swapping granny squares." "Well, darling, I hope for your sake there's some men there that like sports and camping and adventure and outdoor stuff. Otherwise I can't see you lasting too long on there either unless you find that needle in the haystack of a woman that can keep up with you." :-)
He could care less about my being on here as it has zippo to do with obedience and more to fact that I can't stand being around most Traditional Catholic women because they usually don't do any physical activities or sports after age 20, if that.
I have lost count of the number of times I have asked women to go for a walk, go for a bike ride, go skiing, go snowshoeing, go hiking, go camping, etc. "No, I am busy with the parish quilt-a-thon, bake-sale, bazaar, fill-in-the-blank parish thing," "No, I am too old for that," (as they complain about how much weight they have put on and that they can't touch their toes anymore, or can't lose their baby weight after 5, 6, 10 kids--have they tried?)
Any women here actually do or like any of the following?: Skiing (both kinds), snowshoeing, ice skating, horseback riding (English and Western), SCUBA diving, aquarium keeping, camping/survival stuff, hiking, walking, swimming, para sailing, water sports, snorkeling, exploring in caves, fixing things, cars, canning, gardening? Those are just a few things. There are other interests also. I gave some in my introduction about domestic things.
If you do, please let me know, and I may decide to hang around awhile longer. Otherwise, my penance is over for Advent, and this forum has wasted shockingly so much of my time in the short time that I have been here with little return on my investment. (My typing speed is back up there, so that's okay). I have learned a few things political-wise, and a couple of things about the Faith. But I honestly don't know what would keep me here. There is just a lot of weird posts about stuff that really has no business being here, but that's my opinion.
I have no interest in spoiling anyone else's time here and am quite happy being the black sheep. I have never been much of a follower and am a natural leader that is much more of a Joan of Arc than a shy daisy. I would happily stop at an accident for you, jumpstart your car, deliver your groceries, climb a ladder to clean your gutters, cook something for you, etc., whatever, but I hate wasting my time reading absolute drivel about parish issues. And no, I don't have to read those posts, but here it is in black and white:
I will side with the side of a Priest before any lay person, period. Without a Priest, you have no Mass, period. Y'all are cooking your own goose there by chasing away a good number of future Priests that may wish to say Mass, too. ***It will be a sad day if you don't have a Priest for Mass in the near future. Instead of being grateful for having the luxury of the Sacraments, there are too many swelled up with a pride that puts themselves above the office and authority and Holy Orders of the Priesthood.***
Do you realize that in Canada, there are MANY PEOPLE that cannot get to Mass for Christmas? They don't have any options to choose from, period? Y'all don't know what side your bread is buttered on. I am dead serious. Y'all are acting like a bunch of spoiled brats and ungrateful children!
I have never heard such sad talk about Priests ministering in a chapel from supposedly Traditional Catholics. (And uncanny, that it happens to be in CA, AGAIN. What, did a bunch of those Trads move from San Jose, Santa Monica or Watsonville to join your chapel? Crazy. I am beginning to think I have actually met some of you in real life! No way do I want to get entangled with those people again. I was much, much younger then, but already had it figured out there was something crazy about their trying to tell a Priest how to run his parish and school!)
There are also a lot of weird and paranoid posts about other topics, but I will excuse those because of the strange disinformation campaigns going on everywhere and the tendency for some people to be gullible.
Merry Christmas to all, and have a Wonderful New Year for 2022 should I stop posting in the near future, and you indeed do get your wish. :-)
God Bless you,
Anne
P.S. And I could care less about how many downvotes or thumb-downs or what-not I get by posting this either. Bring it all on!
-
Miseremini! Look what you started!
(https://i.imgur.com/HEoXwa7.jpg)
-
I have no interest in spoiling anyone else's time here and am quite happy being the black sheep.
I for one hope that you stick around, Miss Annie. That we here on CI are a group of such different characters is what makes it interesting, real, and Catholic. It often reminds me of going to a family reunion (think Addams family meets the Clampetts, but Catholic ;)) .
While at times tempers flare and things get a bit out of hand it provides the important service of forcing a person to grow.
Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend. (Proverbs 27:17)
(https://i.imgur.com/KsIab27.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/puXnlFZ.png)
-
Life saving indeed. Seems unnaturally drawn to a male environment. There is no praise like self-praise which demonstrates an unhealthy lack of humility.
-
Life saving indeed. Seems unnaturally drawn to a male environment. There is no praise like self-praise which demonstrates an unhealthy lack of humility.
IF you are *talking about me?* How about you (and any others doing the same), at least have the courtesy and guts to talk TO ME, instead of couching your nonsense in a post? I bet you wouldn't have the courage to say anything like that to my face, but I would have no qualms about telling you to buzz off with your twat.
Did it ever occur to you that God does not always give a person sisters or indeed many females in ordinary life? THINK before you judge someone. You know zippo! Take your assumptions and shove along. I have survived absolute horrors and still been successful considering.
Ever heard of Saint Joan of Arc? Study a bit about her. You might learn something.
God gives each person unique talents, gifts, strengths, abilities and situations. I challenge you to walk one mile in my shoes or put up with what I have had to endure. Then you can come back and spiel off. But since you can't even post directly to me, I already know that you couldn't handle being in my shoes.
I don't have any respect whatsoever for your kind of people. ZERO respect. The fact that you are here on a supposedly Catholic forum and you can't directly address me tells me all I need to know about you. Gutless.
Merry Christmas! Buh-bye now.
-
The usurpers on the OLHC school board have now told Father Starbuck that they are putting him on on “vacation” and they will not permit him to say the Midnight Mass, nor any Christmas Masses.
Was Midnight Mass or any Christmas Masses offered today?
-
Cera is exactly telling the truth and I think you are taking obstinately one side in favor of the board member. NO Gossip at all. they gradually narrow and finally choke Fr Starbuck's priestly right in our Traditional Catholic chapel. not allowing to say mass Chirstmas eve midnight and after on until when? ( temporal or not) anyway the lay people have the authority to allow or permit or forbid whatever they want? Still do you think it is gossip?
-
:laugh1:
Thanks so much. I will add you to the ignore list of persons if that is what you wish. :-) :laugh1:
-
Miseremini! Look what you started!
(https://i.imgur.com/HEoXwa7.jpg)
Are you mocking me, or complimenting me? I am going to go with that you are mocking me. Just a hunch. Please do correct me if I am wrong. Btw, I don't know (or care) who this character/cartoon is, so if that's your bag, it ain't mine.
Cheers, Anne.
-
Cera is exactly telling the truth and I think you are taking obstinately one side in favor of the board member. NO Gossip at all. they gradually narrow and finally choke Fr Starbuck's priestly right in our Traditional Catholic chapel. not allowing to say mass Chirstmas eve midnight and after on until when? ( temporal or not) anyway the lay people have the authority to allow or permit or forbid whatever they want? Still do you think it is gossip?
Oh my gosh, did you join just so you could post here about this? I am so sorry. Please let me know when the remainder of your parishioners have signed up here, or the rest of California. What's the population now? 40 Million? More? Has anyone in North America not read this thread yet?
IF you go to that chapel, posting here is NOT helping your cause one iota. None. I promise you. Not one iota. This thread needs to die because anyone that continues to post here while attending that chapel is denser than Christmas fruitcake at this point. Lawyers are no doubt waiting in the wings to pounce if you are in that chapel. (Disclaimer: Not a laywer, just using my good judgment).
There is more than one reason to be cautious, keep your head down and be quiet and not post about INTERNAL chapel problems. By posting about chapel problems, it hurts the entire Body of Christ. It does NOTHING positive whatsoever except warn the smart people here to stay the heck away from your chapel! So thanks for that.
So go have yourself a wonderful and Merry Christmas and please address any or all of your concerns directly to the proper church and legal authorities down there in California.
Thanking you in advance (and you may or may not thank me later, it won't matter). Merry Christmas and be assured of my prayers for you and your chapel, Anne.
-
Certainly, Fr. Starbuck gave a talk last Sunday at the 7:30am Mass at OLHC. A talk that stated a number of truths, but was most certainly one that exhibited a lack of charity and wisdom and scandal. Yes, our beloved Monsignor Perez could have done a better and/or more open job of vetting previous priests that were here. It was an unfortunate lack of judgment. However, what Fr. Starbuck said would have been more appropriate in a meeting with the lay board and, most certainly, the discussion of Fr. Wiest. This discussion of an individual in the public is unwise, uncharitable and is not what one would expect from an aspiring pastor.
Due to this serious lack of charity and wisdom and desire to "bring his case" before the public of OLHC, it was certainly wise to refrain from a wider distribution of this scandalous behavior and, therefore, the request to not give the "sermon" at the 10:00 am Mass. Again, the talk, which again, would have been better in a private meeting with the board has shaken some people's faith and caused dissension. Was this the goal?
What was the reason to bring that discussion to the broader forum like this? So people could talk about something they do not fully know or understand while partisans of one side or the other sally forth into battle while others egg them on? All this shows is a distinct lack of charity, wisdom and, moreover, a love of scandal. Whoever these people are they want to talk about the board as "money grubbing" and "power hungry" without giving thought or care for the years that the board and their families have put into this Chapel along with Fr. Schell and Fr. Perez. What "power" and what "money" could they expect to obtain? All they were trying to do with their priests was to establish an oasis of the Catholic Faith for their families, themselves and others. The calumny hurled at them is shameful and those responsible should repent of their actions.
Is a board in a Catholic parish optimal? No, it is not but we do not live in normal times and there are very sound reasons that Fr. Schell created it and Fr. Perez supported it. Very strong reasons. Additionally, to name an individual of the parish by name, Joel Iddings, and to lie and spread lies about him is terrible and shameful. Are those people doing that, also work as hard as he does to support the chapel? Do they support the school and do all the time consuming things that he does to keep the chapel going? He is a most charitable man and well-respected. I have been at the Chapel since 2005 and I have known Fr. Starbuck since he came. I do not wish to speak ill of any priest, but Fr. Starbuck is not a martyr. And, again, to put this whole matter in a public forum like this or any forum is scandalous and slanderous. I hope those that are doing it are satisfied with what they have caused.
Are there problems at every chapel, yes. People are people and none of us are perfect. However, to discuss a serious matter like this seems more like politicking and trying to win points instead of prayerfully, charitably and wisely seeking a solution. May the Lord have mercy on our souls and may our Lord grant grace to our chapel and may it continue to be an oasis of the Catholic Faith as Fr. Schell and Fr. Perez wanted.
-
Thanks, and a Merry Christmas to you also :-) It's unfortunate that you still don't see what is going on. IF you attend that chapel, you are contributing to the problem, period. If you don't attend that chapel? Then shouldn't you be baking cookies or something? If you can dish it out, then you should be able to take it. Oui?
My husband's point was mostly about women that stir up the pot. Legally you could be getting into big trouble. But keep going there Betty Crocker, you and your gal-pals (and yes, some of the men) are doing a bang-up job. He was trying to warn from experience, but has no dog in the fight. He feels sorry for all of you. And excuse me if I didn't count the actual number of men versus women. Small potatoes when the principle remains the same.
This is one reason why I cannot stand working with women, just sayin.' I will take a male boss any day, (unless I am the boss, which I have been). Being on any parish committee, women's group, or board with women is migraine-inducing. Two women is fine, anymore than that is time for Alka-Seltzer.
We were considering joining a certain parish once. I went around and around listening to a group of ladies that were arguing about how to cut brownies for a funeral reception. One lady was mad that I was wearing "her apron," (without a name on it), that had been handed to me by another lady "in charge." (I hate aprons, but wore it out of courtesy). They then proceeded to argue about slicing the buns, and how much the butter should be melted. They wanted me to join their group. "No thanks, I would rather wash my car." The best part of that women's group is the husband of one of the ladies that makes wicked perogies. YUM!
I have been surrounded with men the majority of my life, have worked a variety of highly skilled fields with huge responsibilities and have been appreciated for being able to do a job well and without a lot of trouble. I saved a man's life two weeks into a traditionally male-dominated field. He was ever so grateful. I had the respect of every man on that crew from day one or two. I wasn't sitting around on my butt wasting time or talking about getting my nails done. But that's nice once in awhile, too.
Lives depended on my position. Cattiness, gossip, and "Mrs. knows-what-she-said-he-said" would end up DEAD on the job because they would be too busy yakking and the machinery would be in their path. As just one detail of many, I was running hundreds of dump-trucks a day in and out/on a massive project. I was constantly bothered by a jealous female. Some of the attitudes here remind me of working with them in another field.
If you have problems in your chapel, then people need to stop posting names, discussing the Priests, and otherwise discussing it. You may find yourself in the centre of a lawsuit or two by your helpfulness. There are things called libel and slander and defamation of character, etc. Those things are very real. It would be a terrible thing to receive a legal letter for Christmas because people that go to Mass there don't know when to leave well enough alone and a number of people are sued. And if the Priest can't easily call 9-11 or needs a panic button, then one should be provided for him.
I lurked for almost 2 years on this board, and thought maybe it might be nice to actually sign up. I mentioned it to my husband and he said, "I hope it turns out to be a nice thing for you." "Well, they do have a private women's group, but I probably won't fit in there either. Not interested in discussing baby wipes or spit-up, and I could care less about knitting or swapping granny squares." "Well, darling, I hope for your sake there's some men there that like sports and camping and adventure and outdoor stuff. Otherwise I can't see you lasting too long on there either unless you find that needle in the haystack of a woman that can keep up with you." :-)
He could care less about my being on here as it has zippo to do with obedience and more to fact that I can't stand being around most Traditional Catholic women because they usually don't do any physical activities or sports after age 20, if that.
I have lost count of the number of times I have asked women to go for a walk, go for a bike ride, go skiing, go snowshoeing, go hiking, go camping, etc. "No, I am busy with the parish quilt-a-thon, bake-sale, bazaar, fill-in-the-blank parish thing," "No, I am too old for that," (as they complain about how much weight they have put on and that they can't touch their toes anymore, or can't lose their baby weight after 5, 6, 10 kids--have they tried?)
Any women here actually do or like any of the following?: Skiing (both kinds), snowshoeing, ice skating, horseback riding (English and Western), SCUBA diving, aquarium keeping, camping/survival stuff, hiking, walking, swimming, para sailing, water sports, snorkeling, exploring in caves, fixing things, cars, canning, gardening? Those are just a few things. There are other interests also. I gave some in my introduction about domestic things.
If you do, please let me know, and I may decide to hang around awhile longer. Otherwise, my penance is over for Advent, and this forum has wasted shockingly so much of my time in the short time that I have been here with little return on my investment. (My typing speed is back up there, so that's okay). I have learned a few things political-wise, and a couple of things about the Faith. But I honestly don't know what would keep me here. There is just a lot of weird posts about stuff that really has no business being here, but that's my opinion.
I have no interest in spoiling anyone else's time here and am quite happy being the black sheep. I have never been much of a follower and am a natural leader that is much more of a Joan of Arc than a shy daisy. I would happily stop at an accident for you, jumpstart your car, deliver your groceries, climb a ladder to clean your gutters, cook something for you, etc., whatever, but I hate wasting my time reading absolute drivel about parish issues. And no, I don't have to read those posts, but here it is in black and white:
I will side with the side of a Priest before any lay person, period. Without a Priest, you have no Mass, period. Y'all are cooking your own goose there by chasing away a good number of future Priests that may wish to say Mass, too. ***It will be a sad day if you don't have a Priest for Mass in the near future. Instead of being grateful for having the luxury of the Sacraments, there are too many swelled up with a pride that puts themselves above the office and authority and Holy Orders of the Priesthood.***
Do you realize that in Canada, there are MANY PEOPLE that cannot get to Mass for Christmas? They don't have any options to choose from, period? Y'all don't know what side your bread is buttered on. I am dead serious. Y'all are acting like a bunch of spoiled brats and ungrateful children!
I have never heard such sad talk about Priests ministering in a chapel from supposedly Traditional Catholics. (And uncanny, that it happens to be in CA, AGAIN. What, did a bunch of those Trads move from San Jose, Santa Monica or Watsonville to join your chapel? Crazy. I am beginning to think I have actually met some of you in real life! No way do I want to get entangled with those people again. I was much, much younger then, but already had it figured out there was something crazy about their trying to tell a Priest how to run his parish and school!)
There are also a lot of weird and paranoid posts about other topics, but I will excuse those because of the strange disinformation campaigns going on everywhere and the tendency for some people to be gullible.
Merry Christmas to all, and have a Wonderful New Year for 2022 should I stop posting in the near future, and you indeed do get your wish. :-)
God Bless you,
Anne
P.S. And I could care less about how many downvotes or thumb-downs or what-not I get by posting this either. Bring it all on!
I think what you are saying is interesting. Let’s start a new thread and leave this one. There are other women here who are out doors too. A couple of them live off the grid.
-
I have worked with men most of my life and still do.
-
Then I have to tell truck drivers not to take the Lord’s name in vain.
-
:incense::pray:
Think happy. Think positive. Think baby Jesus!
-
I'm was new to this chapel, just as I was discovering Traditional Catholicism and this chapel has a very special place in my heart. I stopped going there because of the things I've learned about Fr Wiest which is something that Fr Starbuck alluded to and other things that have been mentioned on this board which anyone can look up so I won't list them.
While I have not gone back, I do still care about this chapel and I was so new that I did not get to make any contacts/friendships while I was there. Right after Mass I had to go to work so I could not stick around to talk to anyone besides to thank the Priests.
So, I understand that for some of you threads like this one may be irrelevant but for someone like me (new to the chapel), this and the OLHC website are my only sources of information. If the situation with Fr. Wiest is clarified and resolved I would consider returning.
-
:incense::pray:
Think happy. Think positive. Think baby Jesus!
Yes indeed!
-
Then I have to tell truck drivers not to take the Lord’s name in vain.
I find praying under my breath is effective. I have to measure the response with each encounter.
-
I for one hope that you stick around, Miss Annie. That we here on CI are a group of such different characters is what makes it interesting, real, and Catholic. It often reminds me of going to a family reunion (think Addams family meets the Clampetts, but Catholic ;)) .
While at times tempers flare and things get a bit out of hand it provides the important service of forcing a person to grow.
Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend. (Proverbs 27:17)
(https://i.imgur.com/KsIab27.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/puXnlFZ.png)
Oh bless your heart, thanks. And I see you HAVE met some of my family members in the first picture? ;-)
As to the second one, that seems to apply more to the CA crowd. I just say Y'all intentionally when I am trying to round up the herd. I only use it with Americans. If speaking with Canucks I would say, "You guys."
Y'all come back now, ya hear? :-)
-
I have worked with men most of my life and still do.
Oh my, what a scandal! ;) :laugh1:
Hooray! I have found a kindred spirit by the sounds of it!
I need new steel-toed boots. (Literally). Should I get black again, or deerskin? :popcorn:
-
I'm was new to this chapel, just as I was discovering Traditional Catholicism and this chapel has a very special place in my heart. I stopped going there because of the things I've learned about Fr Wiest which is something that Fr Starbuck alluded to and other things that have been mentioned on this board which anyone can look up so I won't list them.
While I have not gone back, I do still care about this chapel and I was so new that I did not get to make any contacts/friendships while I was there. Right after Mass I had to go to work so I could not stick around to talk to anyone besides to thank the Priests.
So, I understand that for some of you threads like this one may be irrelevant but for someone like me (new to the chapel), this and the OLHC website are my only sources of information. If the situation with Fr. Wiest is clarified and resolved I would consider returning.
Hi, hello, welcome, pull up a chair, a pontoon boat, or a skidoo. I am really sorry there have been issues of concern for you, but getting reliable information about that chapel is not going to come from this thread. I can 100% promise you that.
At this point I recommend consulting your local police department there in CA to enquire directly about individual persons and doing checks on them or finding out the correct procedure for doing so.
I have gone from trying to figure things out to finding myself reading the National Enquirer.
Dude, sir, friend, buddy, however you would like to be addressed in a casual and friendly, non-threatening manner, I am sure that God has allowed this to unfold in His good time, and that if you have other options for going to Mass, I highly suggest you take them and don't look back. If you are meant to know the outcome, then God will find some way to let you know.
Otherwise, perhaps it is better you don't know the outcome. Think of it like betting on your favourite team--I am not liking the odds with this particular chapel. ;-)
Cheers, and Merry Christmas! Anne.
-
I like my square toe Durango’s. They aren’t steel toed but very comfortable.
-
I have worked with men most of my life and still do.
This could be why you are a tough Trad woman 🤷🏻♂️
Mele Kalikimaka!🌲
-
I like my square toe Durango’s. They aren’t steel toed but very comfortable.
Thanks, but they have to be steel-toed. Unsafe otherwise and against regulations. I will keep those in mind for outside work at home, though. :-)
-
This could be why you are a tough Trad woman 🤷🏻♂️
Mele Kalikimaka!🌲
Post of the day award for your greeting to your fellow poster Viva! Here's your free box of Rice-A-Roni. :laugh1:
It would be great to spend some time in HI after Christmas. Do you know if they would deliver some sunshine and palm trees in a box? Meanwhile, I have that song stuck in my head now. Maybe I will pour a glass of wine and actually play the song. It couldn't hurt. It's only a blizzard here with total white-out conditions and cars in the ditches everywhere. We polished off half a small cheesecake as our dessert and have a bunch of candles and lanterns ready to go in case the power goes out again (which it probably will).
After today I think I will get the Hubster a new snow blower as his big Christmas gift and change my mind about we discussed getting. I'm thinking a more skookum gas one.
Wow, that wind here is wicked!
https://youtu.be/BtdEufWBDo8 Classic voices. Actual singing, and not screeching lot a lot of so-called junk being called "music" these days.
-
For members of Our Lady Help of Christians (now in utter chaos) the Christmas Novena Masses will be said by our dear faithful Father Starbuck in his home Chapel. Twenty-five of us were there on Christmas morning for Mass. Mass again this morning. Please contact Father Starbuck if you are interested in attending Mass.
-
What was the reason to bring that discussion to the broader forum like this? So people could talk about something they do not fully know or understand while partisans of one side or the other sally forth into battle while others egg them on? All this shows is a distinct lack of charity, wisdom and, moreover, a love of scandal. Whoever these people are they want to talk about the board as "money grubbing" and "power hungry" without giving thought or care for the years that the board and their families have put into this Chapel along with Fr. Schell and Fr. Perez. What "power" and what "money" could they expect to obtain? All they were trying to do with their priests was to establish an oasis of the Catholic Faith for their families, themselves and others.
I don't know anything about the chapel in question, but I know this:
Seeking "power" at a chapel is CERTAINLY a "thing". And even "money", to an extent, insofar as countless parishioners over the years have sought influence over how money is spent. So yes, that's seeking after money in a way. Certainly power and influence.
But my point: seeking power and influence in a chapel, intrigues, politics, etc. are CERTAINLY a "thing" at Traditional chapels -- that much is NOT OPEN FOR DEBATE.
Now we could debate about how much of a problem it is at this particular chapel. But don't act like there's no tendency or reason, anywhere, for Trads to fall into that vice. Because they do so, all over the country, ON THE REGULAR. It seems to be an inescapable part of human nature, when thrown into a situation like this one (Trad chapels that are more-or-less independent islands unto themselves, no Roman authorities over them, etc.) Even SSPX has this problem, and they're a professional organization that operates like they ARE the Catholic Church most of the time. They have hierarchy and structure. But still each chapel is on its own more or less, so parishioners jockey for power and influence with the priest, etc.
Right here in San Antonio, at least one estate was donated with the proviso that "Fr. Zigrang be transferred away from the chapel". Interestingly, he WAS transferred away for a couple years, but then was transferred back. I would laugh my butt off if that was only done to get that inheritance from that parishioner. :laugh1:
What's insane is that Fr. Zigrang wasn't even controversial. There were no scandals or even problems at the chapel during his 10 year tenure. The closest thing to a problem was the overcrowding -- but that wasn't his fault. I don't know what would cause a parishioner to dislike him so strongly. Was the parishioner just flexing their muscles, a raw exercise of power for power's sake? It had to be.
I spoke with another priest who said the SSPX wanted to know his "assets" -- right after he received an inheritance. His exact words: "They can SMELL it". The SSPX is really into money and real-estate grubbing these days. But I'm getting off-topic.
In both these cases, you have the NATURAL taking center-stage. Money, influence, power. When a parishioner, priest, or organization loses sight of the spiritual dimension, all you have left is the natural. And it's completely natural for people in large groups (larger than, say, 20 or 25 people) to "play politics" and jockey for influence. It happens everywhere.
Even Ham Radio groups apparently have "politics", though I haven't experienced it personally. So much so, that my local group of hams goes out of their way to stay informal, have no organized group, meetings, or dues, so as to eliminate politics. But I bet there are still some politics under the surface. Everyone knows who has money to donate for prizes, who has a tractor/shredder, who has the land for the Field Day events, etc.
-
This whole episode makes Fr. Perez look really bad.
-
This whole sad episode makes Father Starbuck look really good.
-
If this is making Fr. Perez look bad, it's his own fault.
-
I find praying under my breath is effective. I have to measure the response with each encounter.
Huh, a downvote for praying under my breath. Who knew? Who is the loser that gave a downvote for praying??? Troll.
-
Spiritual Prophecy:
Those who participated either covertly or overtly in turning their backs and betraying Fr. Starbuck's presence of 15 years of blood, sweat and tears here in OLHC will face the spiritual retribution of God's anger. God will not be mocked of his holy priest, Fr. Starbuck! God remembers and will not forget those of you who have received the graces for 15 years of Fr. Starbuck's confessions, baptisms, anointing of the sick (last rites) and funerals. This, in addition to receiving the Body & Blood of our Crucified Savior through the most holy consecrated hands of Fr. Starbuck! Now to have Father's detractors act in the end like Peter & Judas when questioned of his association with Christ "I KNOW HIM NOT!"
What nerve of this usurper"priest" who forcibly bullied his way onto the pulpit taking over and taking away the rightful ownership of Christmas Masses from Fr. Starbuck this weekend without an iota of conscience on this "priest's" part! It was as if he OWNED the chapel and has been here for years! What a lie! This was truly an ugly, crude, dishonorable and despicable act of insensitivity to Fr. Starbuck!
Finally, in addition, like Christ in his passion, for Father Starbuck to be brutalized like Christ with a vicious "assault-like" behavior of this 7:30 usher named "JOEL IDDINGS." He viciously banged on the door of the confessional WHILE FATHER WAS HEARING CONFESSIONS and demanded that Father not repeat his sermon at the 10:00 a.m. which he gave at the 7:30 a.m. Mass! That sermon is contained herein at the beginning of these postings of "OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck"
Father actually felt threatened and extremely fearful by this individual's brutal aggression against him. "JOEL IDDINGS" then ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit before the 10:00 a.m. Mass so Father would not be able to give this sermon with a mike. Bravely, Father gave it without a mike anyway.
Sources in the parish have now informed me that this individual had ordered Father Starbuck to not come on church property any longer and attempt to say any Masses at all this last Christmas weekend! In addition, if Father were to come on the property of OLHC, Mr. Iddings had threatened Father that he would see to it that Father be arrested for trespassing!"
This after this great priest has given his heart & soul to this parish for 15 years! Am I the only one who is coming to the defense of Father and believes that Father has been brutalized, betrayed and dishonored by these people! ? God will not be mocked!
-
Sources in the parish have now informed me that this individual had ordered Father Starbuck to not come on church property any longer and attempt to say any Masses at all this last Christmas weekend! In addition, if Father were to come on the property of OLHC, Mr. Iddings had threatened Father that he would see to it that Father be arrested for trespassing!"
Who has the title to the property?
-
As a long-time parishioner at OLHC. I have known Father Starbuck there for about the past 15 years. I remember his first day there. What a holy, humble priest.
Father has been praying the Latin Mass at least since then, including the short period of time of his illness which, I am sure he offered up for Our Lady Help of Christians parish.
I was there at the 7:30 AM PST Mass where he read the information that has been shared earlier on this forum. He did this with truth, grace, humility, and charity.
I was amazed at the response of the "the board." How uncharitable and un-Catholic like!!! What Father read was the Truth, and I believe he had the right to express it in order to keep the moral integrity of the chapel by insuring the proper vetting of ANY proposed "priest" who refuses to reveal any of his historic priestly service, credentials and who will not submit to any background check! For its own protection, OLHC parishioners had the right to hear it!
Father is in my daily prayers. Please keep him in your prayers... He is such a holy, humble priest...
In the meantime, I have needed to find another Latin Mass, the best that I can, as I do not want to be a participant in this treatment of Father Starbuck, by attending OLHC.
In God's Peace.
FaithHopeCharity
-
As a long-time parishioner at OLHC. I have known Father Starbuck there for about the past 15 years. I remember his first day there. What a holy, humble priest.
Father has been praying the Latin Mass at least since then, including the short period of time of his illness which, I am sure he offered up for Our Lady Help of Christians parish.
I was there at the 7:30 AM PST Mass where he read the information that has been shared earlier on this forum. He did this with truth, grace, humility, and charity.
I was amazed at the response of the "the board." How uncharitable and un-Catholic like!!! What Father read was the Truth, and I believe he had the right to express it in order to keep the moral integrity of the chapel by insuring the proper vetting of ANY proposed "priest" who refuses to reveal any of his historic priestly service, credentials and who will not submit to any background check! For its own protection, OLHC parishioners had the right to hear it!
Father is in my daily prayers. Please keep him in your prayers... He is such a holy, humble priest...
In the meantime, I have needed to find another Latin Mass, the best that I can, as I do not want to be a participant in this treatment of Father Starbuck, by attending OLHC.
In God's Peace.
FaithHopeCharity
Amen. Thirty former OLHC members are now attending Sunday Mass said by Father Starbuck. Sister te Deo, an adult altar server and several choir members are with us also. Father Starbuck's phone number is in all the old bulletins or you can PM me.
Let us continue to pray the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary (or begin today) for the rot at the chapel to be rooted out and for the protection and guidance of our good and holy priest, Father Starbuck.
God bless you, Faith Hope and Charity.
-
Spiritual Prophecy:
Those who participated either covertly or overtly in turning their backs and betraying Fr. Starbuck's presence of 15 years of blood, sweat and tears here in OLHC will face the spiritual retribution of God's anger. God will not be mocked of his holy priest, Fr. Starbuck! God remembers and will not forget those of you who have received the graces for 15 years of Fr. Starbuck's confessions, baptisms, anointing of the sick (last rites) and funerals. This, in addition to receiving the Body & Blood of our Crucified Savior through the most holy consecrated hands of Fr. Starbuck! Now to have Father's detractors act in the end like Peter & Judas when questioned of his association with Christ "I KNOW HIM NOT!"
What nerve of this usurper"priest" who forcibly bullied his way onto the pulpit taking over and taking away the rightful ownership of Christmas Masses from Fr. Starbuck this weekend without an iota of conscience on this "priest's" part! It was as if he OWNED the chapel and has been here for years! What a lie! This was truly an ugly, crude, dishonorable and despicable act of insensitivity to Fr. Starbuck!
Finally, in addition, like Christ in his passion, for Father Starbuck to be brutalized like Christ with a vicious "assault-like" behavior of this 7:30 usher named "JOEL IDDINGS." He viciously banged on the door of the confessional WHILE FATHER WAS HEARING CONFESSIONS and demanded that Father not repeat his sermon at the 10:00 a.m. which he gave at the 7:30 a.m. Mass! That sermon is contained herein at the beginning of these postings of "OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck"
Father actually felt threatened and extremely fearful by this individual's brutal aggression against him. "JOEL IDDINGS" then ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit before the 10:00 a.m. Mass so Father would not be able to give this sermon with a mike. Bravely, Father gave it without a mike anyway.
Sources in the parish have now informed me that this individual had ordered Father Starbuck to not come on church property any longer and attempt to say any Masses at all this last Christmas weekend! In addition, if Father were to come on the property of OLHC, Mr. Iddings had threatened Father that he would see to it that Father be arrested for trespassing!"
This after this great priest has given his heart & soul to this parish for 15 years! Am I the only one who is coming to the defense of Father and believes that Father has been brutalized, betrayed and dishonored by these people! ? God will not be mocked!
You are not the only one.
As Incred has pointed out, this is spiritual warfare.
Please join us in saying the 54-day Rosary for the rot at OLHC to be rooted out and for Our Lord and Our Lady to protect and guide Father Starbuck.
-
Oh my gosh, did you join just so you could post here about this?
Says the lady who joined this month.
Says the lady who keeps attempting to shut down this thread.
-
This whole episode makes Fr. Perez look really bad.
This Priest just died. You are a bad example to ANYONE here, or anyone that attends that chapel, or anyone that reads this.
It is posts like yours that are the perfect example of why this thread is the most pathetic one here, and you are a terrible example of charity.
As I said before, you (or others) DON'T deserve Mass or the Sacraments if you act like this or talk like this, or insist that you somehow have to be right about your little chapel and all its disasters.
Shame on you. Shame on you.
-
If this is making Fr. Perez look bad, it's his own fault.
I will repeat my post for you.
This Priest just died. You are a bad example to ANYONE here, or anyone that attends that chapel, or anyone that reads this.
It is posts like yours that are the perfect example of why this thread is the most pathetic one here, and you are a terrible example of charity.
As I said before, you (or others) DON'T deserve Mass or the Sacraments if you act like this or talk like this, or insist that you somehow have to be right about your little chapel and all its disasters.
Shame on you. Shame on you.
-
Says the lady who joined this month.
Says the lady who keeps attempting to shut down this thread.
Lady, I didn't join for the specific purpose of posting to this thread as it is clear many OLHC people did. I tried to help you out, but I am done, done, done like dinner, and will not be helping you again.
You clearly cannot see the forest for the trees, and neither can the rest of your OLCH ladies and parishioners that keep posting here and BASHING Priests.
Bye now. All the best with you future endeavours. Shame on ALL of you.
-
Anne, be careful or you could become the new XavierSem!
-
What is the full name of the new priest?
-
This Priest just died. You are a bad example to ANYONE here, or anyone that attends that chapel, or anyone that reads this.
Shame on you. Shame on you.
Phoney. If its true that Fr.Perez openly despised Fr. Starbuck and let laity know it and if it's true that he refused to vet Fr. Weist then yes, he looks really bad.
-
Phoney. If its true that Fr.Perez openly despised Fr. Starbuck and let laity know it and if it's true that he refused to vet Fr. Weist then yes, he looks really bad.
Quotes from Saint Catherine of Siena-"The Dialogue" (On the Reverence Due to Priests)
The reverence you pay to [priests] is not actually paid to them but to me, in virtue of the blood I have entrusted to their ministry. If this were not so, you should pay them as much reverence as to anyone else, and no more. It is this ministry of theirs that dictates that you should reverence them and come to them, not for what they are in themselves but for the power I have entrusted to them, if you would receive the sacraments of the Church….
So the reverence belongs not to the ministers, but to me and to this glorious blood made one thing with me because of the union of divinity with humanity. And just as the reverence is done to me, so also is the irreverence, for I have already told you that you must not reverence them for themselves, but for the authority I have entrusted to them. Therefore you must not sin against them, because if you do, you are really sinning not against them but against me. This I have forbidden, and I have said that it is my will that no one should touch them. (116)
NB: Saint Catherine makes no bones about criticizing Priests either. This is what God told her:
If all the other sins these people have committed were put on one side and this one sin on the other, the one would weigh more in my sight than all the others. (116)
Here's another quote for you:
For this reason no one has excuse to say, “I am doing no harm, nor am I rebelling against holy Church. I am simply acting against the sins of evil pastors.” Such persons are deluded, blinded as they are by their own selfishness…. It is me they assault, just as it was me they reverenced. To me redounds every assault they make on my ministers: derision, slander, disgrace, abuse. Whatever is done to them I count as done to me….
By not paying me reverence in the persons of my ministers, they have lost respect for the latter and persecuted them because of the many sins and faults they saw in them. If in truth the reverence they had for them had been for my sake, they would not have cut it off on account of any sin in them. For no sin can lessen the power of this sacrament, and therefore their reverence should not lessen either. When it does, it is against me they sin. (116)
-------
-
Anne, be careful or you could become the new XavierSem!
“It takes no courage to stand in a crowd shouting for the death of your enemies. It takes courage to stand alone against that crowd.”
― Marty Rubin
-
What is the full name of the new priest?
It is better to be watched by a wild animal than a nosey man--Berber Proverb
-
It seems a pity that this site gets occasionally overtaken by people who are newcomers full of ill informed verbosity and pointless repetition. There seems to be a new Xavier in the making.
-
Who has the title to the property?
It looks like the school owns the property and the pastor is just a hired employee so the BOD has the legal right to cast Fr. Starbuck aside. Any priest who goes to an independent chapel needs to get his status written down and notarized at the very least. The independent chapel route is very risky and runs the risk of turning into a cult or Protestantism.
It looks like we may lose access to the traditional Mass in my diocese and my family has been talking about what to do next. We may have to move. I don't know what will happen but I know my husband will refuse any independent chapels because of this sad story.
-
The following reasonable questions which were raised by Fr. Starbuck is THE reason that he has been (after 15 years of service to OLHC) persecuted and ordered not to come back on the property of OLHC under the threat of being arrested for trespassing!
These questions should be considered by all who read this thread. We should ask ourselves "Why isn't it reasonable and just that Fr. Starbuck raised these questions to ensure that any priest's history and background be made public before allowing his presence at OLHC?" Shouldn't REFUSING to divulge ANY INFORMATION of ones history as a priest raise "red flags" for the faithful? Why are there NO SEARCH RESULTS OF ANY KIND ON GOOGLE, THE INTERNET OR ANY BACKGROUND CHECKING SITE for the name "Fr. Michael Weist?"
Excerpts from Fr. Starbuck's Original Sermon December 19, 2021 at 7:30 a.m. Mass:
"After Fr. Perez’s death, a lay board rose up asserting its legal authority to appoint the next “pastor” of this parish. THIS IS LUTHERANISM PURE AND SIMPLE...Laypeople could never have the ecclesial power or jurisdiction to appoint or create a pastor. That they may have a legal right [but] IT IS NOT THE SAME AS HAVING A DIVINE RIGHT."
"My continuous requests for the vetting of priests serving in this parish have not & [were] not met! We have had a couple of “priests” coming through here whose ordination I found questionable... Five years ago, I proposed to Fr. Perez the following specific requirements of any priest serving in this parish. And they [were] the following:
1. A criminal background check with ID, performed by a reputable third party, meeting state compliancy.
Also, the background check that I am requesting is not just a clearance check. It must consist of a positive trace of the person’s history.
2. References.
3. A chronological work history.
4. Proof of ordination. And I want to know the ordaining bishop, seminary, and formational contacts."
Therefore, "I am asking that the vetting of "Fr." Michael Wiest be completed, and that the results of that be made public. The problem is THAT THERE IS NO PUBLIC LIFE OF ANY "FR." MICHAEL WIEST! IN SHORT, THERE IS NO SUCH PERSON!
-
The following reasonable questions which were raised by Fr. Starbuck is THE reason that he has been (after 15 years of service to OLHC) persecuted and ordered not to come back on the property of OLHC under the threat of being arrested for trespassing!
These questions should be considered by all who read this thread. We should ask ourselves "Why isn't it reasonable and just that Fr. Starbuck raised these questions to ensure that any priest's history and background be made public before allowing his presence at OLHC?" Shouldn't REFUSING to divulge ANY INFORMATION of ones history as a priest raise "red flags" for the faithful? Why are there NO SEARCH RESULTS OF ANY KIND ON GOOGLE, THE INTERNET OR ANY BACKGROUND CHECKING SITE for the name "Fr. Michael Weist?"
Excerpts from Fr. Starbuck's Original Sermon December 19, 2021 at 7:30 a.m. Mass:
"After Fr. Perez’s death, a lay board rose up asserting its legal authority to appoint the next “pastor” of this parish. THIS IS LUTHERANISM PURE AND SIMPLE...Laypeople could never have the ecclesial power or jurisdiction to appoint or create a pastor. That they may have a legal right [but] IT IS NOT THE SAME AS HAVING A DIVINE RIGHT."
"My continuous requests for the vetting of priests serving in this parish have not & [were] not met! We have had a couple of “priests” coming through here whose ordination I found questionable... Five years ago, I proposed to Fr. Perez the following specific requirements of any priest serving in this parish. And they [were] the following:
1. A criminal background check with ID, performed by a reputable third party, meeting state compliancy.
Also, the background check that I am requesting is not just a clearance check. It must consist of a positive trace of the person’s history.
2. References.
3. A chronological work history.
4. Proof of ordination. And I want to know the ordaining bishop, seminary, and formational contacts."
Therefore, "I am asking that the vetting of "Fr." Michael Wiest be completed, and that the results of that be made public. The problem is THAT THERE IS NO PUBLIC LIFE OF ANY "FR." MICHAEL WIEST! IN SHORT, THERE IS NO SUCH PERSON!
Well said. Since it's evident that no such person at "Fr." Michael Wiest has ever existed, this raises the question. Who is he?
Scroll down on this 2006 SSPX publication and you will see photos of someone who looks very much like the mysterious Michael Wiest. (The photo is older than the 2006 article, so he may look younger.)
http://www.virgo-maria.org/articles_HTML/2009/001_2009/VM-2009-01-23/VM-2009-01-23-A-00-Mgr_Williamson_Roberts.html (http://www.virgo-maria.org/articles_HTML/2009/001_2009/VM-2009-01-23/VM-2009-01-23-A-00-Mgr_Williamson_Roberts.html)
The person in the photo is Bishop Terence Fulham, who was a SSPX priest who went rogue. Docuмents exist that he married and had children. Supposedly he died around the time "Fr." Michael Wiest appeared. Hmmm.
-
It seems a pity that this site gets occasionally overtaken by people who are newcomers full of ill informed verbosity and pointless repetition. There seems to be a new Xavier in the making.
It seems a pity that you cannot even read your own status there "Newbie," as per your Avatar. Pot meet kettle.
:laugh1:
Hi Nishant! You back?
-
Correction:
The problem is THAT THERE IS NO PUBLIC LIFE OF ANY "FR." MICHAEL WIEST! IN SHORT, THERE IS NO SUCH PUBLIC PERSON!
-
The following reasonable questions which were raised by Fr. Starbuck is THE reason that he has been (after 15 years of service to OLHC) persecuted and ordered not to come back on the property of OLHC under the threat of being arrested for trespassing!
These questions should be considered by all who read this thread. We should ask ourselves "Why isn't it reasonable and just that Fr. Starbuck raised these questions to ensure that any priest's history and background be made public before allowing his presence at OLHC?" Shouldn't REFUSING to divulge ANY INFORMATION of ones history as a priest raise "red flags" for the faithful? Why are there NO SEARCH RESULTS OF ANY KIND ON GOOGLE, THE INTERNET OR ANY BACKGROUND CHECKING SITE for the name "Fr. Michael Weist?"
Excerpts from Fr. Starbuck's Original Sermon December 19, 2021 at 7:30 a.m. Mass:
"After Fr. Perez’s death, a lay board rose up asserting its legal authority to appoint the next “pastor” of this parish. THIS IS LUTHERANISM PURE AND SIMPLE...Laypeople could never have the ecclesial power or jurisdiction to appoint or create a pastor. That they may have a legal right [but] IT IS NOT THE SAME AS HAVING A DIVINE RIGHT."
"My continuous requests for the vetting of priests serving in this parish have not & [were] not met! We have had a couple of “priests” coming through here whose ordination I found questionable... Five years ago, I proposed to Fr. Perez the following specific requirements of any priest serving in this parish. And they [were] the following:
1. A criminal background check with ID, performed by a reputable third party, meeting state compliancy.
Also, the background check that I am requesting is not just a clearance check. It must consist of a positive trace of the person’s history.
2. References.
3. A chronological work history.
4. Proof of ordination. And I want to know the ordaining bishop, seminary, and formational contacts."
Therefore, "I am asking that the vetting of "Fr." Michael Wiest be completed, and that the results of that be made public. The problem is THAT THERE IS NO PUBLIC LIFE OF ANY "FR." MICHAEL WIEST! IN SHORT, THERE IS NO SUCH PERSON!
1. Hey, if you actually go back and read all of my posts, you will see very clearly what side I am on. It's all there. But for those who think it is wrong to keep bashing Priests, (alive or dead), well, keep going.
2. Unless YOU, PERSONALLY know FACTS about x person being who they say they are, then you and all the others attending that chapel are only speculating, which is dangerous turf to stand on.
I also even mentioned going to the Police Station in one post to a poster. Why would I give such advice? Hint, because there's obviously some funny stuff going on and only the police can help you with who is or is not a certain person. That's it.
3. The original poster, Cera, clearly has a deep love for the Mass and the Sacraments, and is obviously in great distress about a number of things. She has now since indicated a means to attend a certain Priest's Mass, and it is clear by her post that intelligent people can figure out how to get there.
Being a woman myself, I can understand how emotions can sometimes get raw, and it can be missed that a person is actually extending a hand and is trying to calm the waters. She perhaps took offense, and that is fine. I am new here, but that doesn't stop a person in good faith from trying to help another lady.
I also said that I would stop helping her, and yet here I am again, on her thread. WHY? Because the greater virtue of Justice applies here, and it's not up to you or I to dish it out, if you will. See point 4 below.
4. There is a difference between ordinary respect due persons, and the reverence due to Priests. IF there is any question about who is, or is not a Priest, it is generally not up to the laity to determine that. You might have a natural inclination to want to know everything at once, but it probably will not happen that way. (Think of crime scene investigation as the first example that comes to mind).
If you do not understand which authority that you need to be addressing for your particular concerns (police, lawyer, SSPV, SSPX, Bishop Williamson, etc.), then you are making things worse by jumping to conclusions, naming names in public and so on. You are neither helping any Priest, your "cause" or quest for information, etc.
The one Priest is dead, and he is not coming back. Let him to God's mercy and pray for him!!! If he was never a Priest? You will now never know until perhaps the Last Judgment. BUT HERE IS THE WARNING--It is much better you consider that he was a Priest, and in good faith reverence him, than the reverse. That is why I posted in regards to Saint Catherine.
5. Whomever is publicly threatening a person or Priest in the confessional, or making him feel afraid, etc. is a person to avoid, period. But it is not up to you or I, or the next guy to do anything else about it-that is up to Father Starbuck and his own good judgment. And his alone! It seems like he is wise, or else he would not have said what he did in the sermon you posted above.
6. Think of me what you will, and that goes for all others here. I have done nothing wrong except temporarily distract on a thread to get people to STOP AND THINK about the consequences of their actions and such in a delicate matter and potential legal minefield that is going on at your chapel. That's all I am guilty of, and nothing more.
7. Speculating about why the Priest died is not in the pay grade of people unless they are legally investigating his cause of death. etc. Just sayin.' But if you think it is easy being a Priest? Ask any of them what it is like. I have had more than one say the worst part of being a Priest is the parishioners. Makes perfect sense to me. I am guessing there are too many people running around trying to tell Priests what to do instead of being UNDER them.
8. Independent chapels are not the first place I would personally consider going to Mass for many reasons, and sadly, this chapel just confirms things. If it falls apart, then it is because God wills it. If it stands, then it will get straightened out in His good time, not ours. But if there were people that were okay with the one Priest before he died and now are suddenly turned on him without full facts? That is very dangerous waters to be wading in. If there is some sort of weird imposter Priest or something? See above for what to do.
9. For all the people that attended the chapel and spent time slinging mud and accusations and stuff on this thread? You would have probably been better off saying a Rosary for God's help, and praying for help, etc. Cera even posted something about praying a Rosary Novena, etc. Y'all need to pray more for that place, and keep hush, lest you add to the mud and evil going on there.
10. If you end up with a good Priest, it is not because you probably deserve it, but God in His mercy has sent you one. But if you end up with a bad Priest? Then yes, God has sent you one because you do.
So if someone is more inclined to be a Priest groupie, if you will, or have "favourites?" Then they will be more inclined to his faults and human failings and act accordingly. So if you worship a man, you will always be disappointed. If you worship God, you will never be.--Anne.
:-) Prayers.
-
Correction:
The problem is THAT THERE IS NO PUBLIC LIFE OF ANY "FR." MICHAEL WIEST! IN SHORT, THERE IS NO SUCH PUBLIC PERSON!
I don't know what happened to my post where I missed including it in there, but anyway, it's not rocket science to attend another parish or go to the police station yourself to run a background check, etc., if you have legitimate reasons for doing so, but if you don't, then you could find yourself in hot water is what I was trying to convey.
My concern also would be because there is a school involved with minor kids. So if I went there or had kids there? I would be gone. I would pull them out and not think twice about it.
If the older Priest is available, then he has probably been around a long time, and it would probably be fine to attend his Mass. If people are too inconvenienced by having to drive another 20 minutes or whatever on the freeway to attend another Mass? Then they maybe don't think that much of Mass to begin with. There are oodles of chapels all over CA.
CA is heavily populated and dense, and if a person wanted to do something weird or criminal, they might be able to get away with it for a little bit longer than X chapel in Cornfield, Iowa. Common sense to me, but anyway, all the best to you, Anne.
-
The person in the photo is Bishop Terence Fulham, who was a SSPX priest who went rogue. Docuмents exist that he married and had children. Supposedly he died around the time "Fr." Michael Wiest appeared. Hmmm.
The obituary for +Fulham:
https://www.merrittfuneral.com/obituary/BishopTerence-Fulham
-
Take another look at the photo of "Bishop" Fulham and then look at one of the photos of Wiest on this site. Hmm.
Faking your own death takes work — and lots of cash
On paper, at least, Elizabeth Greenwood died while visiting the Philippines in 2013. Multiple witnesses reported seeing her rental car collide at high speed with another vehicle. Both drivers were seriously injured; doctors at a local hospital pronounced Greenwood dead on arrival.
The docuмents have all the right official seals, watermarks and signatures, but they’re fake. There was no accident.
Obtaining her own death certificate was the culmination of years of research for Greenwood, who – in addition to being alive and well – is the author of the new book “Playing Dead: A Journey Though the World of Death Fraud.” She doesn’t recommend you try faking your own death.
Greenwood got her falsifying docuмents for free in the course of researching and writing her book. She says the mechanics of faking your own death range from just a few hundred dollars for a faux death certificate all the way up to $30,000 to hire a professional fixer to help erase your physical and digital trails. (That’s in addition to the cash you’d need to launch your new life.)
CNBC talked to Greenwood about why money is a big motivation for faking your own death, as well as why it often trips up would-be fakers.
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/30/faking-your-own-death-takes-work--and-lots-of-cash.html
-
- For photo of Mr. Michael Wiest see him promoting his Chinese antique shop.
- https://www.harborcountry-news.com/features/eclipse-shop-in-three-oaks-filled-with-treasures/article_63387aae-97f5-5004-b9bc-710fdf373563.html (https://www.harborcountry-news.com/features/eclipse-shop-in-three-oaks-filled-with-treasures/article_63387aae-97f5-5004-b9bc-710fdf373563.html)
-
(https://i.imgur.com/CwzB3fQ.png)
Scroll down on this 2006 SSPX publication and you will see photos of someone who looks very much like the mysterious Michael Wiest. (The photo is older than the 2006 article, so he may look younger.)
http://www.virgo-maria.org/articles_HTML/2009/001_2009/VM-2009-01-23/VM-2009-01-23-A-00-Mgr_Williamson_Roberts.html (http://www.virgo-maria.org/articles_HTML/2009/001_2009/VM-2009-01-23/VM-2009-01-23-A-00-Mgr_Williamson_Roberts.html)
The person in the photo is Bishop Terence Fulham, who was a SSPX priest who went rogue. Docuмents exist that he married and had children. Supposedly he died around the time "Fr." Michael Wiest appeared. Hmmm.
-
Very sympathetic to the plight of OLHC members and their concerns about Michael Weist. Have followed this story closely and with interest. But I think the Terrance Fulham angle is outlandish and irresponsible, and I would recommend dropping it quickly so as not to give your opponents any leverage.
-
Very sympathetic to the plight of OLHC members and their concerns about Michael Weist. Have followed this story closely and with interest. But I think the Terrance Fulham angle is outlandish and irresponsible, and I would recommend dropping it quickly so as not to give your opponents any leverage.
I hear you and I think the point you raise is a good one. The problem is:
Although Michael Wiest as a layman did exist for a short period of time, there is absolutely no record of any Father Michael Wiest existing anywhere At all. Ever. Zero.
That problem may be related to the problem that when Wiest requested to work with altar boys, he refused to comply with California state law that he submit his drivers' license and fingerprints.
Father Perez instructed Father Starbuck to work with the school board so that Wiest would follow the law intended to protect children and show his drivers' license.
Father Starbuck followed up and was met by vicious attacks from the school board for following through with Father Perez's request.
Why does Wiest refuse to show his drivers' license?
Why does the school board support his refusal to do so?
Do you see the problem?
Do you see an alternative explanation?
-
Seems to me that if the board has asked Fr Starbuck to leave, and if the board supports a quasi-fake-priest-Weist, then this whole turmoil is a blessing in disguise. Fr Starbuck should move on and start fresh. In the last 50 years since Tradition started, he won't be the first priest this has happened to.
-
Besides Joel Iddings, who is on the School Board? Are they the original members? When did Joel come on board?
-
I ask because I can't imagine the original Board believing the Wiest is a priest.
-
Catechism of the Catholic Church (2120) - Second Edition
"Sacrilege consists in profaning or treating unworthily the sacraments and other liturgical actions, AS WELL AS PERSONS [more so a consecrated priest - Father Starbuck] things, or places CONSECRATED TO GOD. Sacrilege is a grave sin..."
Thus banging on the confessional door by this aforementioned individual who's identity has been revealed earlier in this blog constitutes a Sacrilege by:
Impeding & Interfering with the Sacrament of Confession
Demanding and frightening the priest to open the confessional door
Deliberately and angrily ordering Father "Not to give that sermon again at the 10:00 Mass"
Impeding and trying to prevent the ability of Father to give his sermon by ripping the mike off the alter podium
Finally, attention should be given to this individual's general behavior and contempt towards Father.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
St. Thomas Aquinas (II-II:81:5; I-II:101:4)
"A thing is called "sacred" through being deputed to the divine worship. Now just as a thing acquires an aspect of good through being deputed to a good end, so does a thing assume a divine character through being deputed to the divine worship, and thus a certain reverence is due to it, which reverence is referred to God. THEREFORE WHATEVER PERTAINS TO IRREVERENCE FOR SACRED THINGS [PARTICULARLY REVERENCE TO A PRIEST!] IS AN INJURY TO GOD, AND COMES UNDER THE HEADING OF SACRILEGE."
-
Besides Joel Iddings, who is on the School Board? Are they the original members? When did Joel come on board?
Some are original. Some are not. The principle of the school who is also on the school board is not an original member. The original principal of the school is thoroughly disgusted with the behavior of three of the four school board members (which includes the current principal).
-
Wouldn't it be considered a sacrilege to allow a man pretending that he's a priest to say "Mass" at the altar?
-
Isn't there only 1 board? And they own ALL the property (i.e. church and school)?
-
Some are original. Some are not. The principle of the school who is also on the school board is not an original member. The original principal of the school is thoroughly disgusted with the behavior of three of the four school board members (which includes the current principal).
So, the Board has 4 members including the principal. We already know Iddings and the principal is Mary Lewis. So, can we figure out who are the remaining members? Wouldn't the original principal you mentioned know the names?
-
She stated that the principal in NOT the original one. Wasn't Mary Lewis the original one?
-
According to the 2020 tax filing for padre Pio academy the board members are:
Joel iddings
Thomas washicko
Manuel Soto
Mary lewis-principle
-
Now I'm really confused. Is it possible that the priest's name is Weist & not Wiest & so Weist is a priest? The Board members are all good strong Catholics except Iddings - I'm not sure of him. I can't imagine them allowing a man who isn't a priest to say Mass. Something is missing in this whole story. It's not making sense.
-
Now I'm really confused. Is it possible that the priest's name is Weist & not Wiest & so Weist is a priest? The Board members are all good strong Catholics except Iddings - I'm not sure of him. I can't imagine them allowing a man who isn't a priest to say Mass. Something is missing in this whole story. It's not making sense.
Thorn, Whether it is weist or wiest makes little difference to his state in life. Do a search for both names in the CI engine and you will see that this has all been gone through before in at least half a dozen threads.
-
I don't know what half dozen threads you're talking about. This is the only one I've followed. And you think that these intelligent Catholics would be taken in by a phony priest? It just doesn't make sense. I must have missed 'the rest of the story'.
-
To: "Cera" et al.
From: "SupportFrStarbuck"
Thank you for your inciteful postings and yours and everyone's support here for Father Starbuck. You wrote: "The original principal of the school is thoroughly disgusted with the behavior of three of the four school board members (which includes the current principal)."
I ask what is the name of the "Original principal?" If he is indeed "disgusted with the behavior of three of the four school board members" would it not be appropriate to let him know about this site and for him/her, if he/she wished, to let his/her feelings & thoughts be known regarding how Father Starbuck has been sacrilegiously mistreated by the "School Board" in general and in particular "Joel Idding's" sacrilegious assault-like behavior he perpetrated against Fr. Starbuck?
"Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist or [viciously banging on the door of a confessional while a priest is inside hearing confession followed by an angry "in your face" confrontation demanding and ordering Father to not repeat his sermon at the next Mass might constitute an assault. This followed by a ripping the mike out of the alter podium stand in order to prevent Father from giving his sermon] might be sufficient grounds for an assault if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim."
Legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com
Lastly, it must be note that the confessional is situated in the front and adjacent to the alter a mere 20 feet or so from the Tabernacle of Our Lord and Savior Jesus' presence on the alter of the Blessed Sacrament witnessing this affront to Christ's holy consecrated sacred priest! Thus making Mr. Joel Idding's hostile confrontation with Father even more egregious, scandalous & sacrilegious! This was done while the Church was filling up with the faithful for the next 10:00 a.m. Mass. The obvious intent here was to utterly humiliate and embarrass Father in front of the congregation. What despicable/dishonorable evil-like behavior!
-
To: "Cera" et al.
From: "SupportFrStarbuck"
Thank you for your inciteful postings and yours and everyone's support here for Father Starbuck. You wrote: "The original principal of the school is thoroughly disgusted with the behavior of three of the four school board members (which includes the current principal)."
I ask what is the name of the "Original principal?" If he is indeed "disgusted with the behavior of three of the four school board members" would it not be appropriate to let him know about this site and for him/her, if he/she wished, to let his/her feelings & thoughts be known regarding how Father Starbuck has been sacrilegiously mistreated by the "School Board" in general and in particular "Joel Idding's" sacrilegious assault-like behavior he perpetrated against Fr. Starbuck?
"Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist or [viciously banging on the door of a confessional while a priest is inside hearing confession followed by an angry "in your face" confrontation demanding and ordering Father to not repeat his sermon at the next Mass might constitute an assault. This followed by a ripping the mike out of the alter podium stand in order to prevent Father from giving his sermon] might be sufficient grounds for an assault if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim."
Legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com
Lastly, it must be note that the confessional is situated in the front and adjacent to the alter a mere 20 feet or so from the Tabernacle of Our Lord and Savior Jesus' presence on the alter of the Blessed Sacrament witnessing this affront to Christ's holy consecrated sacred priest! Thus making Mr. Joel Idding's hostile confrontation with Father even more egregious, scandalous & sacrilegious! This was done while the Church was filling up with the faithful for the next 10:00 a.m. Mass. The obvious intent here was to utterly humiliate and embarrass Father in front of the congregation. What despicable/dishonorable evil-like behavior!
-
SupportFr.Starbuck - how were these postings 'inciteful'? Meaning 'to stir up', Or did you mean 'insightful' which means exhibiting insight? Quite a difference.:fryingpan:
-
She stated that the principal in NOT the original one. Wasn't Mary Lewis the original one?
No. The first principal was Jim (I forget his last name).
-
Thorn, Instead of spell checking and providing dictionary assistance and playing the "Gotcha" game of correcting misspelled words, etc., perhaps you should pay more attention to the facts of this matter that you are obviously being oblivious to and not questioning Wiest's claim that he is a "priest?" Wiest continues to this day to not address and reveal any information at all about himself as requested by Father Starbuck (AND AN EVER INCREASING NUMBER OF FAITHFUL HERE AT OLHC) as outlined in the first page of this thread. Did you miss this?
We here at OLHC demand and we will not be satisfied until this individual reveals his past public life! A legitimate question posed here is what happens, for argument's sake, in the end if it is revealed (God forbid) that he is not a priest!? What kind of outraged serious legal ramifications and liability OLHC and "The Board" would face if OLHC faithful learn that we have been going to confession revealing our sins to an imposter and also believing that we have been receiving "communion" from a "priest?" What if The Board might have known about this all along!? Why hasn't The Board insisted that he be properly vetted? What are they hiding? This total lack of transparency should be a "red flag" to any of the OLHC faithful's consideration whether we are being told the truth or not! Therefore, WE, OLHC faithful have a right and demand to make known:
1. A criminal background check with ID, performed by a reputable third party, meeting state compliancy.
Also, the background check that I (Father) am requesting is not just a clearance check. It must consist of a positive trace of the person’s history.
2. References.
3. A chronological work history.
4. Proof of ordination. And I want to know the ordaining bishop, seminary, and formational contacts.
BTW, Thorn... What exactly are you "missing" regarding these above mentioned questions/facts outlined here numerous times throughout this thread and your claim "that you must have missed 'the rest of the story?'"
Do you get it now?
Blessed Mother and the Holy Ghost... please come to our aid... that we be washed from our sins by the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord and Savior... Jesus Christ. Amen
-
I don't know what half dozen threads you're talking about. This is the only one I've followed. And you think that these intelligent Catholics would be taken in by a phony priest? It just doesn't make sense. I must have missed 'the rest of the story'.
Yes, You have missed 'the rest of the story'.
Go to the top of this page. Third from left after HOME and Help, you will see Search. Click on that, then write Wiest in the little box that appears then GO or Search. The threads of which I spoke will pop up. Then do the same with Weist.
-
So from what I can gather here and elsewhere, Fr. Starbuck has been unceremoniously kicked out of his parish by school board members and threatened with charges of trespassing if he returns? Is this true?! If true, this is horrible!!
Okay, my imagination tends to run a little wild sometimes, but could it be that someone(s) want to get rid of him because he is hard on the case of Fr. Wiest and his public history as a priest? Who are the priests staffing the chapel now? They have three Sunday Masses on their calendar.
(I did not put "Fr." in parenthesis only because he deserves the benefit of the doubt at this point, but there are grave questions surrounding Wiest's biography as docuмented here.)
-
could it be that someone(s) want to get rid of him because he is hard on the case of Fr. Wiest and his public history as a priest?
You ask if Father Starbuck may have been "hard on the case of . . ." a person who may or may not be a priest.
Please keep in mind the following:
For well over a year, members of the chapel went to confession to, received Holy Communion from and entertained in our homes a man who, according to public records, was a known pedophile who had been told that in order to keep his Novus Ordo retirement money he had to agree to be laicized, to never present himself as a priest, and to never again say Mass in public.
Even after the local Bishop notified chapel members of this horrendous situation, Father Perez did nothing. It was Father Starbuck who obtained the legal facts and told us from the pulpit that Father Colletti was leaving and chapel members would be wise to keep their children away from him. At another Mass on the same day, Father Perez covered up for the predator and said from the pulpit that "Father Colletti had been CALLED BACK to his diocese." This is an lie by omission. Thank God for Father Starbuck.
Let us briefly mention the fake nun who Father Perez asked Father Starbuck to take care of, and the fake Pfeiffer priest who the chapel members told Father Perez to get rid of.
Fast forward to January 2021. "Fr." Wiest shows up and claims he met Father Perez 30 years ago in Rome when he was a young seminarian and had nowhere to stay and Father Perez put him up for a period of time. Then he changed his story from Rome to a small town outside of Florence and said he and three other seminarians decided to go to Slovakia and on the way they stopped at Christ the King Seminary and Father Perez allowed them to spend ONE night. The town is 30 minutes East of Florence and NOT on the way to Slovakia. Why did Wiest change his story? He contradicted himself publicly from the pulpit.
He also contradicted himself publicly from the pulpit when he said he was 48 no 58.
He also contradicted himself publicly from the pulpit when he said he had testicular cancer in his last year of high school and recovered completely. Then he said he had testicular cancer in his last year of law school at Yale and recovered completely. These conflicting stories were recorded.
Then he requested to work with altar boys alone, unlike the other priests who are cautious and always invite the adult altar servers and home-school mothers or parents to attend, and are careful to avoid being alone with any minor child.
At this point it was discovered that no such person as Father Michael Wiest had ever existed. Since state law requires that any adult who works with children must submit their fingerprints and drivers license to the state to send on to the DOJ, this was requested of him and he adamantly refused.
Soon after that, Father Perez asked Father Starbuck to take up the problem with the four persons on the school board and Father did as he had been instructed and three of the four members had a conniption fit.
Not content to simply follow the law and protect our children, the school board and Wiest set out to destroy Father Starbuck.
It does not make sense, just as the Great Covid Reset does not make sense. Both the micro problem and the macro problem ONLY make sense when we realize that evil is involved.
Please join us in saying the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for the protection and guidance of Father Starbuck and for the rot to be rooted out of the chapel. Our official start date was the Feast of the Circuмcision, but if you have not yet joined us, please consider doing so.
Father Starbuck now has Masses elsewhere, two Masses on Sundays with standing room only and this week also Thursday, first Friday and first Saturday.
-
To: "Pre1962"
YES! THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED! After 15 years of saying Mass, hearing Confessions, Baptisms and Annointings of the Sick and devoting his life to OLHC Father Starbuck was ordered by JOEL IDDINGS (Board Member) to not come to OLHC to say Christmas Masses at all Christmas weekend. Father was also threatened by this man that if he was to step foot on the property of OLHC HE/JOEL IDDINGS would personally see to it that Father Starbuck would be arrested for trespassing!
-
Is Weist/Wiest/whatever out of the hospital? Does he live on the property? The reputation of the chapel is damaged at this point and this is probably going to end up in court and the school may take a big hit financially but it's best to just clear everything up now instead of dragging it out.
-
Thanks, Nadir, for the instructions. For some reason this thing has been going on so long that I was thinking it was one long thread. I went back & reread a thread, but sad to say I still think that there must be more to this saga. This is my problem: The board is made up of fairly intelligent & solid Catholics. So if we from afar know that Weist is a phony why can't they see it? I just don't get it. If the board were made of people who just converted, then it might make sense. So what am I missing? There's got to be a reason that these people can't see what we see.
-
Weist is out of the hospital & back to saying "mass". The mass is on You Tube & I watched. He had to sit to give "communion" & he has an oxygen tank by the altar which he uses occasionally. and lots of people are participating!! Unbelievable.
-
Can someone explain how this will end up in court and on what basis has anyone a claim? Fr. Starbuck lives in a house that he doesn't own, he has no contract with OLHC or PPA board. He clearly stated he would not listen to the board as it is composed of laypeople and that he would not work under any other priest. In the grievance talk of two weeks ago Fr. Starbuck then brought up Fr. Wiest and talked about him and that an "investigator" investigated Fr. Wiest for him. He spoke about a serious topic where only one side was presented and no opportunity for any other side to be given (much like the modern leftist media) and then it is called censorship to prevent the scandal repeating. Again, this was more appropriate topic for a meeting with the board or with the Monsignor, but that was not done. Instead, division and scandal was introduced just before Christmas and during the time of our mourning for our pastor.
I have to wonder why Fr. Starbuck did not speak with Monsignor Perez in the 6-7 months before the Monsignor died about Fr. Wiest. Why was nothing done? Is this a lapse of judgment on Fr. Starbuck or has the insinuation campaign begun against Monsignor Perez? I know that Fr. Starbuck was often very, very busy, so busy that many times he did not have time to compose a sermon for Sunday or so busy that there was no time for confessions. I have to assume that Monsignor Perez had plenty of time on his hands, even though he was the pastor and responsible for many things, but he had time for sermons and confessions.
I have to wonder why it seems that only one side appears here and often the one side seems to be saying identically the same thing as if it were the same person writing. But that wouldn't happen would it? A lot of talk has been going on and does anyone notice that it appears to be only one side? Does anyone ask why? Has anyone sought the other side? Has anyone spoken to the "evil" board and that "evil" Joel Iddings? No? I guess you have all the truth and all the charity here. So much charity that whoever keeps repeating the names using a tactic the Left likes to use called 'doxxing'. It is sad, very sad. However, there is one truth though and that is by the fruits you will know them. If OLHC is a den of iniquity, a bunch of money hungry, power grubbing people it will fail and Cera and Support Fr. Starbuck or the others can gloat and revel in their spiritual superiority, but what happens if it is the other way?
I told myself that I would say nothing more and let the discontented wear out their discontent; however, the blackening of good peoples' names could not go unanswered. Again, by their fruits you will know them and we will know the fruits in time.
-
Weist is out of the hospital & back to saying "mass". The mass is on You Tube & I watched.
Could you supply a link?
-
On the chapel's youtube video page the name of the priest in question is spelled "Weist". I believe his name is actually spelled "Wiest". The "ie" instead of the "ei". This is the Michael Wiest who has been identified from links and photos on the other threads here as running an antique shop in Michigan and owning the Buddhist altar. The same Michael Wiest of which there is ZERO public history as an ordained Catholic priest before arriving at OLHC. The who, where, and when of his ordination really needs to be known to all in order that these questions and doubts be put to rest. This is not "attacking a person" or any such thing. It's basic public knowledge that parishioners need to know as this person is saying Mass and hearing confessions. Why there should be any resistance to this is mind boggling. I wouldn't want a fake priest to be hearing my confession and pretending to absolve me. What is the holdup with him providing this vital information? It's also illegal in California to refuse to provide identification for a background check when asking to work with children.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSvZT6EWUw-6L21TpMg_YXA/videos (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSvZT6EWUw-6L21TpMg_YXA/videos)
-
I know that Fr. Starbuck was often very, very busy, so busy that many times he did not have time to compose a sermon for Sunday or so busy that there was no time for confessions. .
Mr. Yoder joined CathInfo on Christmas day and has posted twice, both times attacking good holy Father Starbuck. Hmmm. One has to wonder if Mr. Yoder is one of the three troublemakers on the school board, or perhaps the spouse of the most notorious troublemaker.
The statement above is a bald-faced lie which is calumny against a good holy priest. Was he busy? Yes he was doing the work of three priests and concerned about the two priests hospitalized and both on ventilators. He was also concerned about the other chapel members who became ill following Octoberfest.
His sermons have always been strong Catholic teaching which give us food for thought and he always hears confessions. Why would you manufacture this lie that he "did not have time to compose a sermon for Sunday" and another lie that he had "no time for confessions."
Let us continue our 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for the protection and guidance of Father Starbuck and for the rot to be rooted out of the OLHC chapel.
-
I go to the parish and I'm confirming that Fr. Starbuck did in fact refuse to hear someone's confession directly and has stated that he is 'too busy for confessions'. I'm not out to talk about his faults and shortcomings but am simply confirming that what Mr. Yoder has said.
-
The original principal of the school is dead and therefore cannot be thoroughly disgusted with the current board member's behavior.
-
I go to the parish and I'm confirming that Fr. Starbuck did in fact refuse to hear someone's confession directly and has stated that he is 'too busy for confessions'. I'm not out to talk about his faults and shortcomings but am simply confirming that what Mr. Yoder has said.
OLHC is a chapel; it is not a "parish" (which would mean that it would be under a Bishop).
It looks like you joined CathInfo today and your first post was to bash a good priest.
If what you say is true: "I'm not out to talk about his faults and shortcomings" then you would have mentioned that this was during the time two of our three priests were hospitalized and on ventilators, and Father Starbuck was doing the work of all three.
The fact that you failed to mention this brings your motives into question.
-
The original principal of the school is dead and therefore cannot be thoroughly disgusted with the current board member's behavior.
It's a good thing Jim doesn't know you are saying he is dead.
-
I go to the parish and I'm confirming that Fr. Starbuck did in fact refuse to hear someone's confession directly and has stated that he is 'too busy for confessions'. I'm not out to talk about his faults and shortcomings but am simply confirming that what Mr. Yoder has said.
Let's talk about gossip you dimwit. You have NO idea what was in the heart or mind of that Priest, OR any Priest for that matter. He might have been "too busy for confessions" AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME because he had something else he needed to prioritize.
And since you are posting as "nursemaria" I am going to attack at the jugular. You know very well what a nursing care plan is if in fact you are a nurse. So I need to say absolutely nothing more about how to prioritize work.
Get behind thee, Satan!
-
It's a good thing Jim doesn't know you are saying he is dead.
See my post to nursemaria.
-
Again you are misinformed---Fr. Starbuck has been with the parish for 15 years and there have been numerous instances of him not doing his job. While you are correct that we are not under a Bishop, you are mistaken in your comment about a chapel. A church is any place of worship that has a permanent congregation and is run by a pastor or priest. Unlike a church, a chapel is a place of worship that has no pastor or priest and no permanent congregation; it's all about the physical space. So----we are a church then. Are you a parishoner?
-
Wow---guns blazing there. I did not, and you're right, cannot judge the heart, mind and intentions of anyone and I'm not. I'm just stating there have been numerous instances of him not doing his job----not speculating why or what he was thinking or things like that. I'm not quite sure what a nursing care plan has to do with anything and you're making an assumption that he was prioritizing other things vs his job. I think adults can have a robust conversation about a controversial topic without either getting personal or calling names.
-
Again you are misinformed---Fr. Starbuck has been with the parish for 15 years and there have been numerous instances of him not doing his job. While you are correct that we are not under a Bishop, you are mistaken in your comment about a chapel. A church is any place of worship that has a permanent congregation and is run by a pastor or priest. Unlike a church, a chapel is a place of worship that has no pastor or priest and no permanent congregation; it's all about the physical space. So----we are a church then. Are you a parishoner?
Bold is mine. Oh, so now you have left the nursing field and moved into the Priesthood? What makes YOU qualified to judge a Priest, lady?
And doesn't your CA Nursing Body have a regulation in place about social media postings? Yes, I am sure it does. If you wish to keep your job, you might want to review it.
Get behind thee, Satan!
-
Well said! I told myself the same thing which was to let the 'keyboard warriors' wear themselves out but man, it's hard sitting back and only letting one side be told. Cheers to you!
-
Hey there---I was wrong about Mr. Wright. He is alive and well and I'm totally fine owning up to it when I get my info wrong or mis-speak.
-
To: Michael Yoder
Christ said to Peter "Behind me, Satan! Because Thou Art A Scandal Unto Me; Because Thou Savourest Not The Things That Are Of God, But The Things Are Of Men " Matthew 16: 23
After reading your post, I felt a need to take a long hot shower! Your pompous, distasteful, supercilious, elitist, self-rightous indignant, irreverent, criticism and bashing of Fr. Starbuck militates against the truth we, members of OLHC, seek here by our appropriate questioning of the legitimacy of "Fr." Weist!
You are a master of deflection and distraction. You are someone who deflects and ignores the just legitimate concerns of OLHC faithful by your pointless meaningless ramblings. Who are you and why are you here other than to denigrate our Holy Priest? I've been a financially supporting member of OLHC for 16 years! Are you or have you been a financially supporting member of OLHC and how long have you been here? Or are you an outsider or a member of "The Board" who has been persecuting and vilifying Our Holy Priest who is our consecrated sacred representative of Christ?
You wrote: "Can someone explain how this will end up in court and what basis has anyone a claim?" Really?! Where have you been? Oh... wait. You're a "newbie" here and you obviously haven't taken the time to read the legitimate concerns expressed in previous postings here.
You are so very troubled and critical of Fr. Starbuck and your erroneously fabricated shortcomings of him not being available for confession and not preparing his sermons. I ask myself "What planet are you from?" What insidious fabricated lies you are spreading? I've been here for 16 years and Father. is always 95.9% of the time available for confessions before and after Masses. In addition, he is constantly pressed for his time/attention all Sunday mornings by the OLHC faithful.
If he is rarely at times pressed for time for confession its because he is occupied by other responsibilities like getting ready to say Mass! it is not my place to uncharitably and critically judge him but give him the benefit of the doubt because of his Christ-like good will, warmth, earnestness sincerity and love for the faithful!
He had maintained all alone the cohesion of this chapel the last couple of weeks! How dare you question his integrity, honesty and noble faithful adherence to his responsibilities here at the chapel... and to God!
How about these legitimate concerns/questions we have of "Fr." Weise?
1) As previously noted in these postings, He ("Fr." Wiest) requested to work with altar boys alone, unlike other priests who are cautious and always invite the adult altar servers and home-school mothers or parents to attend, and are careful to avoid being alone with any minor child. At this point it was discovered that no such person as Father Michael Wiest had ever existed. Since state law requires that any adult who works with children must submit their fingerprints and drivers license to the state to send on to the DOJ, this was requested of him and he ("Fr." Wiest) adamantly refused!! Why does this not trouble you, "Yoder?"
2) How about the fact that anyone can do a search on Google, or any other search engine for the name "Michael Wiest or Weist" and there is absolutely NO INFORMATION AT ALL THAT THIS PERSON EXISTS!? WHY IS THAT? In fact, there was a background check done on one of the formal background checking services (Truthfinders) and THERE IS NO INFORMATION AT ALL THAT THIS PERSON EXISTS!? I know for a fact and have been told from reputable sources that if a person does not want his name and past criminal and or sɛҳuąƖ proclivities revealed in any background check, one can pay handsomely to have his entire background history/name totally erased from the internet including ones history from ALL background checking companies! Isn't this cause for concern? Why does this not trouble you, "Yoder?"
You wrote: "I have to wonder why Fr. Starbuck did not speak with Monsignor Perez in the 6-7 months before the Monsignor died about Fr. Wiest. Why was nothing done?" Answer: Your wrong! The truth is Fr. Starbuck pressed Father Perez many many times to have Fr. Wiest vetted. Despite Fr. Starbucks serious concerns and repeatedly pressing the issue - IT WAS NOT DONE! I ask myself, considering the seriousness of the matter "WHY WAS NO ACTION TAKEN AND THE VETTING NOT DONE? AGAIN, THIS DESPITE THE FACT THAT FR. STARBUCK REPEATEDLY PRESSED THE ISSUE?" Why does this not trouble you, "Yoder?"
One may ask if Father Starbuck may have been "hard on the case of . . ." a person who may or may not be a priest.
Please keep in mind the following:
"For well over a year, members of the chapel went to confession to, received Holy Communion from and entertained in our homes a man who, according to public records, (Father Colletti) was a known pedophile who had been told that in order to keep his Novus Ordo retirement money he had to agree to be laicized, to never present himself as a priest, and to never again say Mass in public."
Even after the local Bishop notified chapel members of this horrendous situation, Father Perez did nothing. It was Father Starbuck who obtained the legal facts and told us from the pulpit that Father Colletti was leaving and chapel members would be wise to keep their children away from him. At another Mass on the same day, Father Perez covered up for the predator and said from the pulpit that "Father Colletti had been CALLED BACK to his diocese." This is a lie by omission.
YOU BEEN TROUBLED BY SO MANY THINGS WITH FATHER STARBUCK... WHY DOES THIS NOT TROUBLE YOU, "YODER?"
Thank God for Our Champion -- Father Starbuck! His Intervention Saved Our Chapel From Further Ignominy And Possible Legal/Financial Judgement/Ruin & Loss!
BY THE WAY, "YODER" Regarding your remark about "much like the modern lҽϝƚιsƚ media" I am a veteran and life long conservative who still honors the American Flag and the goodness of our men in the military. Did you serve in the military?
AND I do not believe I'm "superior" to other human beings... just a sinner who begs God's mercy when I meet my Savior, Jesus Christ.
Jesus said: "Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you make clean the outide of the cup and of the dish, but within you are full of rapine and uncleanness. Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you are like to whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear to men beautiful, but within are full of dead men's bones, and of all filthiness. Woe you also outwardly indeed appear to men just; but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." Matthew: Chap. 23 : 25-28.
Holy Mother of God and the Holy Ghost... please come to our aid... that we be washed from our sins by the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord and Savior... Jesus Christ. Amen
-
Hey there---I was wrong about Mr. Wright. He is alive and well and I'm totally fine owning up to it when I get my info wrong or mis-speak.
Thank you Maria. Talk to him and listen to what he has to say about the sad situation. Please join us in saying the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary.
-
Thank you for the good laugh today. I appreciate it.
This is my name, I do not hide behind a pseudonym. Just to answer your questions, I have been going to OLHC since 2005, my son has been an altar boy through the request of Monsignor Perez since 2006. My son is handicapped so you will know who we are. I have consistently paid my tithings to our parish (chapel) since that time. Nope, I am not on the board and never have been nor will I ever be. I haven't been around the chapel or the school that long and those people of the board were the pioneers with Fr. Schell and Monsignor Perez. I have served in the Marine Corps, I used to be a "conservative," but I have come to believe that conservatives conserve nothing. Does that answer your questions? I will get behind thee if you want I don't mind nor do I mind the interesting posts. It doesn't rile me up only when good people are besmirched.
May God bless you!
-
I'm not a parishioner but do know several people who frequent the chapel for Mass. I myself attended Mass there for a time some years ago. I knew Fr. Perez personally and am still grieving over his sudden death. It's an enormous loss.
Now, the point of this post: it's a huge red flag to me when the good Fr. Starbuck is suddenly given the boot by some board members after detailing his legitimate and important concerns over the lack of priestly bonafides from "Fr." Wiest and the seeming resistance of said person to reveal his background. After 15 years of faithful service, he's simply evicted and told never to return.
There's no mystery of Fr. Starbuck's legitimacy as a priest. It's public record. There is an obvious mystery about Wiest, and he needs to clear it up pronto. If the board is looking the other way then shame on them. How does one go from the owner of an antique shop in Michigan to a traditional Catholic priest in just a few years, with no known history of seminary or ordination?
It's a simple matter to clear this up.
Who, by the way, is the new priest who can be seen on the recent videos? Fr. Alphonsus? I understand he's helping there now.
-
I'm not a parishioner but do know several people who frequent the chapel for Mass. I myself attended Mass there for a time some years ago. I knew Fr. Perez personally and am still grieving over his sudden death. It's an enormous loss.
Now, the point of this post: it's a huge red flag to me when the good Fr. Starbuck is suddenly given the boot by some board members after detailing his legitimate and important concerns over the lack of priestly bonafides from "Fr." Wiest and the seeming resistance of said person to reveal his background. After 15 years of faithful service, he's simply evicted and told never to return.
There's no mystery of Fr. Starbuck's legitimacy as a priest. It's public record. There is an obvious mystery about Wiest, and he needs to clear it up pronto. If the board is looking the other way then shame on them. How does one go from the owner of an antique shop in Michigan to a traditional Catholic priest in just a few years, with no known history of seminary or ordination?
It's a simple matter to clear this up.
Who, by the way, is the new priest who can be seen on the recent videos? Fr. Alphonsus? I understand he's helping there now.
H Pre 1962,
Fr. Alphonsus is SSPX and temporarily filling in, using of course the 1962 missal.
If your name reflects your desire for the pre-1962 Mass, that is what you will find at Father Starbuck's chapel, just as we have always previously had at OLHC.
Please email Father Starbuck for his Mass schedule. And please joining us in praying the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for Father Starbuck's protection and guidance, and for the rot to be rooted out of OLHC.
-
Hi. This forum is the only way I have been able to learn what has been going on at OLHC. I was the last penitent to have Fr. Starbuck hear my confession. I was next in line when the usher got in front of me and said he had to be next. I thought it was an emergency situation with a parishioner. I then went in and I could tell by Father's demeanor that something had happened. After giving me my penance he told me he would not be hearing any more confessions.
During the homily it was difficult to hear it all as the mic was off. I saw him after Mass and we asked him if he were leaving and his answer indicated he would stay as long as he could and he then blessed our articles. That was the last contact Thanks for the posting of his homily as it cleared up our questions. I've asked a few email questions of the Church Lady and she indicates she doesn't know the answers.
Do you have Fr. Starbuck's email. He is no longer on the bulletin? I think Tustin is too far for me, but I would like to know where he is saying Mass.
Thank you and many Epiphany blessings.
-
Can someone explain how this will end up in court and on what basis has anyone a claim?
I was thinking along the lines of parents being angry that a man of dubious provenance was loved to be alone with their sons.
-
OLHC is a chapel; it is not a "parish" (which would mean that it would be under a Bishop).
sppx does the same thing, but they are not parishes, either.
parish, parishoner, and pastor imply jurisdictional authority.
-
I go to the parish and I'm confirming that Fr. Starbuck did in fact refuse to hear someone's confession directly and has stated that he is 'too busy for confessions'. I'm not out to talk about his faults and shortcomings but am simply confirming that what Mr. Yoder has said.
I was also a parishioner and father will refuse confession if it is not during the times reserved for confession. People have tried come up to them after the designated confession period is over to ask for an impromptu confession. Even Wiest had a whole sermon about this during his first few weeks at the chapel. He talked about decorum - there being a time and place for such things as blessings and confessions. He complained about being stalked by parishioners to bless items and hear confessions out of the normal times reserved for those things.
Maybe you are stating things out of context?
-
I was also a parishioner and father will refuse confession if it is not during the times reserved for confession. People have tried come up to them after the designated confession period is over to ask for an impromptu confession. Even Wiest had a whole sermon about this during his first few weeks at the chapel. He talked about decorum - there being a time and place for such things as blessings and confessions. He complained about being stalked by parishioners to bless items and hear confessions out of the normal times reserved for those things.
Maybe you are stating things out of context?
I'm surprised this is even an issue as indeed I have seen people asking the priest for confession *AFTER Mass* when the priest has appointments after that like giving extreme unction to the sick, leaving for another mass circuit, etc.
-
Again you are misinformed---Fr. Starbuck has been with the parish for 15 years and there have been numerous instances of him not doing his job. While you are correct that we are not under a Bishop, you are mistaken in your comment about a chapel. A church is any place of worship that has a permanent congregation and is run by a pastor or priest. Unlike a church, a chapel is a place of worship that has no pastor or priest and no permanent congregation; it's all about the physical space. So----we are a church then. Are you a parishoner?
There are numerous instances when ALL of the priests have not done their “job” at one time or another. Nobody is perfect and they are human just like us and have demands placed upon them, make mistakes, get stressed out, suffer from diabolical attacks etc. We need to pray for our priests.
-
I go to the parish and I'm confirming that Fr. Starbuck did in fact refuse to hear someone's confession directly and has stated that he is 'too busy for confessions'. I'm not out to talk about his faults and shortcomings but am simply confirming that what Mr. Yoder has said.
Is this unusual?
EVERY time I have asked an SSPX priest to hear my confession when it is not "confession time" I have been refused. Didn't matter which priest. They all refused. Same thing about blessing articles. If they're not "on the table" so the priest can do many items at one time at his leisure, you're out of luck.
It seems to me that Fr. Starbuck, doing the work of 3 priests when Fr. Perez had just died, was blessed by God with fortitude and perseverance for the faithful. It seems he was blessed with humility, too.
-
Is this unusual?
EVERY time I have asked an SSPX priest to hear my confession when it is not "confession time" I have been refused. Didn't matter which priest. They all refused. Same thing about blessing articles. If they're not "on the table" so the priest can do many items at one time at his leisure, you're out of luck.
It seems to me that Fr. Starbuck, doing the work of 3 priests when Fr. Perez had just died, was blessed by God with fortitude and perseverance for the faithful. It seems he was blessed with humility, too.
Amen. Thank you Epiphany.
Please join us in a 54-day Novena Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for Father Starbuck's protection and guidance and for the rot to be rooted out at the chapel. We officially began on the Feast of the Circuмcision. 27 days of petition and 27 days of thanksgiving.
-
Is this unusual?
EVERY time I have asked an SSPX priest to hear my confession when it is not "confession time" I have been refused. Didn't matter which priest. They all refused. Same thing about blessing articles. If they're not "on the table" so the priest can do many items at one time at his leisure, you're out of luck.
If you only have venial sins to confess then the confession can wait. However if you are in mortal sin and the priest refuses to hear your confession, he will answer to God for that. You don't have to say to the priest "Father I am in mortal sin can you hear my confession?" if there are other people around; You can just say "Father can you hear my confession? It's an emergency."
-
Amen. Thank you Epiphany.
Please join us in a 54-day Novena Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for Father Starbuck's protection and guidance and for the rot to be rooted out at the chapel. We officially began on the Feast of the Circuмcision. 27 days of petition and 27 days of thanksgiving.
Novena is a good idea.
St. Joseph is a better idea. He hits the nail on the head every time.
-
If you only have venial sins to confess then the confession can wait.
not necessarily....
-
Hey! "Dusty"
You obviously are a newbie here and perhaps even as a Catholic. You wrote:
"If you only have venial sins to confess then the confession can wait. However if you are in mortal sin and the priest refuses to hear your confession, he will answer to God for that. You don't have to say to the priest "Father I am in mortal sin can you hear my confession?" if there are other people around; You can just say "Father can you hear my confession? It's an emergency."
Where have you been here? Haven't you read all the posts here stating all the reasons a priest is not able to hear "impromptu" confessions!?
First of all if you have mortal sin to confess it is YOUR responsibility to get to confession at the scheduled time and not ambush a priest who probably has other things to do like getting ready for Mass, etc. UNLESS, you are about to die... were you about to die when you've ambushed these priests for confession?
As far as "he (the priest) will answer to God for that" God is very aware of the pressures and myriad of responsibilities that need to be taken care of by a priest.... OBVIOUSLY NOT YOU!
-
sppx does the same thing, but they are not parishes, either.
parish, parishoner, and pastor imply jurisdictional authority.
Yes. If there is a private chapel in a private home or the rectory, etc., it is called a chapel, and NOT a church. Word will be quietly passed on regarding Mass, etc.
Otherwise, if Mass is for everyone, it will specify Church, in the bulletin or notifications, and an event will be called "Parish picnic, or Church picnic," Parish potluck, Church potluck," etc.
The only other time I have seen chapel listed is if it is an actual chapel within a church where Mass is being said. Larger churches and cathedrals and basilicas, etc., come readily to mind, and those are not necessarily SSPX or FSSP Mass centres, either, but merely referring to the physical churches that are built with one or more chapels in them. Europe is filled with such places. (Then you get into things like crypt churches, too).
Smaller chapels that I have come across in both Diocesan Parishes and SSPX or FSSP Mass Centres or Churches/Parishes are usually dedicated Adoration Chapels, but Mass is sometimes said there, also.
If people want to call their parish or church a chapel, I don't really care. I know what they mean. They are going to a physical building for Mass or the Sacraments. :-)
-
Is this unusual?
EVERY time I have asked an SSPX priest to hear my confession when it is not "confession time" I have been refused. Didn't matter which priest. They all refused. Same thing about blessing articles. If they're not "on the table" so the priest can do many items at one time at his leisure, you're out of luck.
It seems to me that Fr. Starbuck, doing the work of 3 priests when Fr. Perez had just died, was blessed by God with fortitude and perseverance for the faithful. It seems he was blessed with humility, too.
If you only have venial sins to confess then the confession can wait. However if you are in mortal sin and the priest refuses to hear your confession, he will answer to God for that. You don't have to say to the priest "Father I am in mortal sin can you hear my confession?" if there are other people around; You can just say "Father can you hear my confession? It's an emergency."
The onus is on the person to get to confession, and not the Priest to hear it. That's right. Read it again. It does not matter the circuмstances of whether or not it is venial versus mortal sins, it is a matter of arranging your time and priorities so that you arrive in time to have your confession heard before Mass, arrange a time with the Priest *before Mass* to have your confession after Mass if it a case of you living at a great distance, you are leaving for a trip right after Mass, some young children are ill at home and this is your only opportunity at the moment, etc.
Bugging a Priest to have your confession heard on your whim and timeframe can be a sign of pride. YOU want YOUR schedule or imprudence to be catered to, instead of humbly submitting to the Priest's schedule, NEED TO PRAY, etc.
If people REGULARLY attend a certain place for Mass, then they usually "know the drill" about Mass times and times for confession, etc. It is very unfair of regular attendees to ask a Priest for confession at a whim, (mortal sins or not), when you KNOW BETTER to make a better effort to get there at the appointed times.
You cannot judge or fault a Priest for having and enforcing HIS schedule. If you are in mortal sin and there is no blood coming out of every orifice in your body upon getting to Mass, then you can probably abstain from Communion and ask Father AFTER MASS to hear your confession IF he has time. Some people might habitually rush into confession 10 minutes before Mass time and then wonder why Priests get upset!
If you are in mortal sin and you HONESTLY tried to get to confession in plenty of time, but you were delayed because of traffic or something outside of your control, then yes, quietly ask the Priest if he has time to hear your confession because it's very important. Explain that you would have been there in ample time if it were not an unavoidable delay, etc. He will give you a time to help you.
If you are in a place with HUNDREDS of people and/or multiple Masses in one day and/or the Priest has to travel "on circuit" or to "missions?" YOU HAD BETTER SCHEDULE YOUR TIME BETTER, PERIOD, and allow extra time for traffic delays on top of getting there in the first place.
Once again, the Priest bashing and lay-people being critical of Priests and playing Priest needs to STOP! The excuses that people make here are crazy.
Same with religious articles blessing mentioned elsewhere:
***If your Priest wants religious articles blessed on a certain day, then BRING THEM ON THAT DAY, and in PLENTY of time to set them up! There ARE DIFFERENT blessings for DIFFERENT types of things! There is a different blessing for a Saint Benedict Medal versus a Rosary, versus a car, versus a horse, versus Easter baskets, versus x,y,z.
Of course a Priest will wonder why he has to bless one Rosary and one medal on Monday when you then bring him a Saint Benedict Medal and Holy Water font and want to be enrolled in the scapular on Tuesday! Then repeat this scenario ad nauseum with dozens of other people adding to their collection.
A Priest will announce blessing times, etc. to alert newcomers to such things and also for His Priorities before God's, NOT YOURS!
Bottom line? Quit being lazy and whiny Catholics! Sorry, but not sorry, but some Americans down there have NO CLUE what sacrifices and hardships MANY Canadians have to make in comparison to have Mass and the Sacraments, get Holy Water, have things Blessed, etc. I live in the second largest country in the world. MANY of our Mass Centres are not accessible at the moment by many people! You figure things out.
Bunch of pansies.
-
The onus is on the person to get to confession, and not the Priest to hear it. That's right. Read it again. It does not matter the circuмstances of whether or not it is venial versus mortal sins, it is a matter of arranging your time and priorities so that you arrive in time to have your confession heard before Mass, arrange a time with the Priest *before Mass* to have your confession after Mass if it a case of you living at a great distance, you are leaving for a trip right after Mass, some young children are ill at home and this is your only opportunity at the moment, etc.
Bugging a Priest to have your confession heard on your whim and timeframe can be a sign of pride. YOU want YOUR schedule or imprudence to be catered to, instead of humbly submitting to the Priest's schedule, NEED TO PRAY, etc.
If people REGULARLY attend a certain place for Mass, then they usually "know the drill" about Mass times and times for confession, etc. It is very unfair of regular attendees to ask a Priest for confession at a whim, (mortal sins or not), when you KNOW BETTER to make a better effort to get there at the appointed times.
You cannot judge or fault a Priest for having and enforcing HIS schedule. If you are in mortal sin and there is no blood coming out of every orifice in your body upon getting to Mass, then you can probably abstain from Communion and ask Father AFTER MASS to hear your confession IF he has time. Some people might habitually rush into confession 10 minutes before Mass time and then wonder why Priests get upset!
If you are in mortal sin and you HONESTLY tried to get to confession in plenty of time, but you were delayed because of traffic or something outside of your control, then yes, quietly ask the Priest if he has time to hear your confession because it's very important. Explain that you would have been there in ample time if it were not an unavoidable delay, etc. He will give you a time to help you.
If you are in a place with HUNDREDS of people and/or multiple Masses in one day and/or the Priest has to travel "on circuit" or to "missions?" YOU HAD BETTER SCHEDULE YOUR TIME BETTER, PERIOD, and allow extra time for traffic delays on top of getting there in the first place.
Once again, the Priest bashing and lay-people being critical of Priests and playing Priest needs to STOP! The excuses that people make here are crazy.
Same with religious articles blessing mentioned elsewhere:
***If your Priest wants religious articles blessed on a certain day, then BRING THEM ON THAT DAY, and in PLENTY of time to set them up! There ARE DIFFERENT blessings for DIFFERENT types of things! There is a different blessing for a Saint Benedict Medal versus a Rosary, versus a car, versus a horse, versus Easter baskets, versus x,y,z.
Of course a Priest will wonder why he has to bless one Rosary and one medal on Monday when you then bring him a Saint Benedict Medal and Holy Water font and want to be enrolled in the scapular on Tuesday! Then repeat this scenario ad nauseum with dozens of other people adding to their collection.
A Priest will announce blessing times, etc. to alert newcomers to such things and also for His Priorities before God's, NOT YOURS!
Bottom line? Quit being lazy and whiny Catholics! Sorry, but not sorry, but some Americans down there have NO CLUE what sacrifices and hardships MANY Canadians have to make in comparison to have Mass and the Sacraments, get Holy Water, have things Blessed, etc. I live in the second largest country in the world. MANY of our Mass Centres are not accessible at the moment by many people! You figure things out.
Bunch of pansies.
Thank you!
-
Is this unusual?
EVERY time I have asked an SSPX priest to hear my confession when it is not "confession time" I have been refused. Didn't matter which priest. They all refused. Same thing about blessing articles. If they're not "on the table" so the priest can do many items at one time at his leisure, you're out of luck.
I would expect a priest to hear a person's confession by special request on a one-time or occasional basis, but if you're asking for that all the time then I can see it being a problem.
As far as your complaint about blessing of articles goes, most churches have one Sunday a month when they bless articles, usually after Mass. If someone doesn't put their article on the communion rail or whatever to be blessed, it doesn't get blessed. The priest can't bless something he doesn't know is even there. So if someone is too negligent to put their stuff on the communion rail before the blessing, and then comes up to the priest as soon as he is done blessing everything and asks him to bless their item because they didn't have it out when he did the blessing, then I think it is reasonable for the priest to say no.
Same goes for people who think they can buy a statue in the church goods store for grandma who lives in Keokuk, Iowa, and then take it to the priest so he can bless it and then they can go straight to the post office, because they don't want to wait until the next time articles are blessed at the church before they mail it out. That sort of request is unreasonable, and if priests had to stop what they are doing and bless an article every time someone bought something as a gift in the bookstore, they would have to sacrifice more important duties to do that, and most priests rightly don't do that. That is why there is an assigned time for people to have their articles blessed.
-
This thread still going on? Ugh.
Of course the topic has changed probably about a half-dozen times. Currently the topic seems to be getting to confession on time, and blessing of religious articles.
-
This thread still going on? Ugh.
Of course the topic has changed probably about a half-dozen times. Currently the topic seems to be getting to confession on time, and blessing of religious articles.
Matthew,
Please keep this topic open. They need to "vent".
Currently, there's a big spiritual battle going on there.
Some Chapel members have invoked St. Benedict and are engaged in spiritual warfare to remove the satanic elements "invited in" by the Phfeifferians.
It's going to be bloody, but in the end, St. Benedict... will kick-out the demonic. :incense:
-
This thread still going on? Ugh.
Of course the topic has changed probably about a half-dozen times. Currently the topic seems to be getting to confession on time, and blessing of religious articles.
Matthew, this thread is still going because we are continuing to try to save our chapel from those who seek to destroy it.
As you point out "the topic has changed probably about a half-dozen times." Read the thread carefully and you will discover that these are blatant attempts to derail the thread.
Furthermore, these attempts to derail the thread are posted by several brand-new members of Cath Info whose posts are focused on
1. attacking Father Starbuck and
2. derailing the thread
The main message of this thread has been to
1. address the truths regarding the attacks on Father Starbuck
2. to encourage others to join us in praying the 54-day to Our Lady of the Rosary for the rot to be rooted out of the chapel and for the protection and guidance of Father Starbuck.
-
Thank you!
You're welcome.
-
EUREKA! I have finally figured out all the things going on at OLHC. That place is infested with demons - starting with the fake nun now a "Carmelite hermit & on thru all the fake "priests" & the visitation & mass by those from Kentucky with their resident warlock, as well as counting all the in-fighting going on. OLHC needs to be shut down until they get a real Bishop to do an exorcism.
-
EUREKA! I have finally figured out all the things going on at OLHC. That place is infested with demons - starting with the fake nun now a "Carmelite hermit & on thru all the fake "priests" & the visitation & mass by those from Kentucky with their resident warlock, as well as counting all the in-fighting going on. OLHC needs to be shut down until they get a real Bishop to do an exorcism.
This is why a group of us have been saying the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for the rot to be rooted out of the chapel and for the protection and guidance of Father Starbuck, who now has his own chapel called St. Dominic's.
-
epiphany & the rest of the ME generation asking priests to hear their confession out of the regular time - Maybe your mommy led you to believe that the sun & moon revolved around you, but I've never heard of anyone waylaying a priest to hear their confession until these posts. You're not the center of the universe & busy priests aren't at your beck & call. Unless you're a convicted murderer that's condemned to death in a few hours, get up early Sunday morn like the rest of us mortals & get in the confession line. I repeat - priests aren't at your beck & call. Most priests after confession get ready for Mass so why should he delay Mass just for you?
-
cera - as powerful as the rosary is, that place still needs an exorcism. It's that bad.
-
epiphany & the rest of the ME generation asking priests to hear their confession out of the regular time - Maybe your mommy led you to believe that the sun & moon revolved around you, but I've never heard of anyone waylaying a priest to hear their confession until these posts. You're not the center of the universe & busy priests aren't at your beck & call. Unless you're a convicted murderer that's condemned to death in a few hours, get up early Sunday morn like the rest of us mortals & get in the confession line. I repeat - priests aren't at your beck & call. Most priests after confession get ready for Mass so why should he delay Mass just for you?
The primary function of all priests is administering the church's seven sacraments: baptism, confirmation, confession, holy communion, marriage, holy orders, and anointing of the sick.
-
No, the primary function of all priests is to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and to administer five of the church's seven sacraments: baptism,
confirmation, confession, holy communion, marriage, holy orders, and anointing of the sick.
That doesn't mean that the priest's timetable and routine ought not to be respected. Common decency goes a long way.
-
epiphany - didn't the priest just hear confessions? You didn't get there in time. Right?
-
There is deliberate, blatant, innuendos, mischaracterizations and downright lies from recent communications on the OLHC January 6th website! "The Board" and those in charge at OLHC continue to lie to this day! The board's utter disregard and overnight dismissal without warning (days before Christmas) of Father Starbuck's 15 year devoted priesthood at OLHC cannot be called anything but ... EVIL!
Here is the actual pdf sermon I've obtained from Fr. Starbuck from today's Mass January 9th at his chapel:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"8 January 2022
Dear Faithful,
On January 6, on the OLHC website, the following words were posted regarding me:
“Father Starbuck’s deciding reply, as he reiterated in his public sermon and as has been published on the internet, was that he would not work under the authority of another priest as pastor; nor would he take any good faith advice from the Board. As you can deduce from the sermon of December 19, Father Starbuck refused to accept Monsignor’s stipulation, effectively declining to work with other priests, and in fact publicly denouncing one by name. This had clearly become an unworkable situation since Father had obviously decided to go his own way. We wish Father Starbuck well and thank him for the years he has spent with us.”
I believe that a response is in order. First of all, I did state to the PPA/OLHC Board that I would not work under another “pastor.” Is there anything wrong with that? That is not insubordination, it is my priestly right. The following statement “nor would he take any good faith advice from the Board” is unintelligible to me, since it is ambiguous and open to more than one meaning. Are they saying ‘that’ I told them that I would not take good faith advice? I did not. Or are they saying that I would (or that I did) not in fact take good faith advice? If they are saying that they had rendered “good faith advice,” to my memory none was never offered. And if it had been, I would have done my best to hear them out. Moreover, their statement that “Father had obviously decided to go his own way,” is not accurate. I had made no such decision, and had told them that, minimally, I wanted to see the situation through to the end of the year, and that I would consider working with them into the indefinite future. I felt that that was the least I could do for the good people of this parish. But instead, on December 23 one member of the Board called me to tell me that I was “on vacation” that weekend and that if I were to appear on church property I would be considered to be “trespassing” and would “be arrested.” (That is the last and final communication that I received from the board.) Because another schedule was later posted on the church website with other celebrants for my Masses (and given the previous threat), I did not return. They later sent the contents of my mail bin home to me, which included outgoing items, with no explanation. Moreover, this same Board continues to tell people that I am on a leave of absence. And perhaps most strikingly, I was never given any notice of termination. So far as I know, maybe I am still employed by OLHC.
They state that I refused to work with other priests. When? They state that I had denounced one by name. When? My criticism on December 19 was not of the priest. My criticism was of the Board for not doing their job to vet priests in the time that I have served this parish. And regarding “Monsignor’s stipulation,” what on earth are they talking about? I was never given any stipulation. Moreover, their tone seems to imply that I am an employee who is answerable to them in the same way other employees are answerable to employers. The same member of the Board, cited above, himself admitted to me that he did not know what I spent all my time doing as a priest (i.e., what a priest’s duties are). Is it not obvious that this Board does not know what a priest does, especially when they have not made one good policy decision since Fr. Perez died? And they have been responsible for numerous misrepresentations of the truth (may I call them lies?). For example, when did Sister Taddeo “return to Korea”? This statement in the January 2 Sunday bulletin was very hurtful to Sister Taddeo, as she faithfully attends Mass now in my chapel and has, indeed, not left the country. And where was the compassion for this Sister who had served this parish for at least ten years in cutting off her rent at the end of December (at Christmas), especially when I had negotiated a continuing rental fee well below market value, retaining a month-to-month agreement with the property manager? This treatment of a religious Sister at this time following the death of Fr. Perez was a heartless calculated decision that saw dollar signs and not human hearts.
Further, I would be remiss in not noting how disappointed Fr. Perez would be with the introduction of the 1962 Roman Missal at OLHC. How much time over the years did he spend criticizing that Missal from the pulpit? He must, indeed, be saddened by this development (even from the grave).
And I want to say that as an independent priest, I have owed no one anything in my ministry at OLHC over the course of this past 15 years. It has all been gratis. And if the situation had been workable with the Board, I would have stayed for at least another 20 years. But I want to be clear in stating that if I had left at any time over the course of my tenure, that would have been my right and my decision to make. I owed no one anything. And it is in that same spirit that I continue my ministry here locally in serving those who seek my ministry, my teaching, and my sacraments.
Finally, one wonders why they will not produce the docuмent they cite. Would Fr. Perez have cogently signed such a docuмent? Regardless, it should be noted that the Catholic Church is not governed by laypeople, nor can it be. The situation of having a priest answering to laypeople is simply not workable, nor could they have ecclesial authority or jurisdiction to elect a “pastor.” They don’t understand his priestly duties, his obligations, Canon law, and certainly not his limitations as a human being. As it was, they were just posting or sending out anonymously written schedules expecting us to jump at their whim. I did not know who was writing what.
Lastly, please let me state that I wish everyone well, including those who stay at OLHC. I have been telling people that I am tired of all the stirrings, and simply want to move forward peaceably. If the Board of PPA/OLHC had handled things better, then they would not feel the need to continue blaming me for their own incompetence. I, therefore, ask them to make better decisions for the parishioners of OLHC, and to accept responsibility for their own decisions."
In our Lord,
Fr. Starbuck
-
There is deliberate, blatant, innuendos, mischaracterizations and downright lies from recent communications on the OLHC January 6th website! "The Board" and those in charge at OLHC continue to lie to this day! The board's utter disregard and overnight dismissal without warning (days before Christmas) of Father Starbuck's 15 year devoted priesthood at OLHC cannot be called anything but ... EVIL!
Here is the actual pdf sermon I've obtained from Fr. Starbuck from today's Mass January 9th at his chapel:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"8 January 2022
Dear Faithful,
On January 6, on the OLHC website, the following words were posted regarding me:
“Father Starbuck’s deciding reply, as he reiterated in his public sermon and as has been published on the internet, was that he would not work under the authority of another priest as pastor; nor would he take any good faith advice from the Board. As you can deduce from the sermon of December 19, Father Starbuck refused to accept Monsignor’s stipulation, effectively declining to work with other priests, and in fact publicly denouncing one by name. This had clearly become an unworkable situation since Father had obviously decided to go his own way. We wish Father Starbuck well and thank him for the years he has spent with us.”
I believe that a response is in order. First of all, I did state to the PPA/OLHC Board that I would not work under another “pastor.” Is there anything wrong with that? That is not insubordination, it is my priestly right. The following statement “nor would he take any good faith advice from the Board” is unintelligible to me, since it is ambiguous and open to more than one meaning. Are they saying ‘that’ I told them that I would not take good faith advice? I did not. Or are they saying that I would (or that I did) not in fact take good faith advice? If they are saying that they had rendered “good faith advice,” to my memory none was never offered. And if it had been, I would have done my best to hear them out. Moreover, their statement that “Father had obviously decided to go his own way,” is not accurate. I had made no such decision, and had told them that, minimally, I wanted to see the situation through to the end of the year, and that I would consider working with them into the indefinite future. I felt that that was the least I could do for the good people of this parish. But instead, on December 23 one member of the Board called me to tell me that I was “on vacation” that weekend and that if I were to appear on church property I would be considered to be “trespassing” and would “be arrested.” (That is the last and final communication that I received from the board.) Because another schedule was later posted on the church website with other celebrants for my Masses (and given the previous threat), I did not return. They later sent the contents of my mail bin home to me, which included outgoing items, with no explanation. Moreover, this same Board continues to tell people that I am on a leave of absence. And perhaps most strikingly, I was never given any notice of termination. So far as I know, maybe I am still employed by OLHC.
They state that I refused to work with other priests. When? They state that I had denounced one by name. When? My criticism on December 19 was not of the priest. My criticism was of the Board for not doing their job to vet priests in the time that I have served this parish. And regarding “Monsignor’s stipulation,” what on earth are they talking about? I was never given any stipulation. Moreover, their tone seems to imply that I am an employee who is answerable to them in the same way other employees are answerable to employers. The same member of the Board, cited above, himself admitted to me that he did not know what I spent all my time doing as a priest (i.e., what a priest’s duties are). Is it not obvious that this Board does not know what a priest does, especially when they have not made one good policy decision since Fr. Perez died? And they have been responsible for numerous misrepresentations of the truth (may I call them lies?). For example, when did Sister Taddeo “return to Korea”? This statement in the January 2 Sunday bulletin was very hurtful to Sister Taddeo, as she faithfully attends Mass now in my chapel and has, indeed, not left the country. And where was the compassion for this Sister who had served this parish for at least ten years in cutting off her rent at the end of December (at Christmas), especially when I had negotiated a continuing rental fee well below market value, retaining a month-to-month agreement with the property manager? This treatment of a religious Sister at this time following the death of Fr. Perez was a heartless calculated decision that saw dollar signs and not human hearts.
Further, I would be remiss in not noting how disappointed Fr. Perez would be with the introduction of the 1962 Roman Missal at OLHC. How much time over the years did he spend criticizing that Missal from the pulpit? He must, indeed, be saddened by this development (even from the grave).
And I want to say that as an independent priest, I have owed no one anything in my ministry at OLHC over the course of this past 15 years. It has all been gratis. And if the situation had been workable with the Board, I would have stayed for at least another 20 years. But I want to be clear in stating that if I had left at any time over the course of my tenure, that would have been my right and my decision to make. I owed no one anything. And it is in that same spirit that I continue my ministry here locally in serving those who seek my ministry, my teaching, and my sacraments.
Finally, one wonders why they will not produce the docuмent they cite. Would Fr. Perez have cogently signed such a docuмent? Regardless, it should be noted that the Catholic Church is not governed by laypeople, nor can it be. The situation of having a priest answering to laypeople is simply not workable, nor could they have ecclesial authority or jurisdiction to elect a “pastor.” They don’t understand his priestly duties, his obligations, Canon law, and certainly not his limitations as a human being. As it was, they were just posting or sending out anonymously written schedules expecting us to jump at their whim. I did not know who was writing what.
Lastly, please let me state that I wish everyone well, including those who stay at OLHC. I have been telling people that I am tired of all the stirrings, and simply want to move forward peaceably. If the Board of PPA/OLHC had handled things better, then they would not feel the need to continue blaming me for their own incompetence. I, therefore, ask them to make better decisions for the parishioners of OLHC, and to accept responsibility for their own decisions."
In our Lord,
Fr. Starbuck
-
BTW, there were 75 devoted faithful of Father Starbuck who attended his two Masses last Sunday. There were 90 who attended today. Lets all pray for our Holy Priest, Father Starbuck.
There is deliberate, blatant, innuendos, mischaracterizations and downright lies from recent communications on the OLHC January 6th website! "The Board" and those in charge at OLHC continue to lie to this day! The board's utter disregard and overnight dismissal without warning (days before Christmas) of Father Starbuck's 15 year devoted priesthood at OLHC cannot be called anything but ... EVIL!
Here is the actual pdf sermon I've obtained from Fr. Starbuck from today's Mass January 9th at his chapel:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"8 January 2022
Dear Faithful,
On January 6, on the OLHC website, the following words were posted regarding me:
“Father Starbuck’s deciding reply, as he reiterated in his public sermon and as has been published on the internet, was that he would not work under the authority of another priest as pastor; nor would he take any good faith advice from the Board. As you can deduce from the sermon of December 19, Father Starbuck refused to accept Monsignor’s stipulation, effectively declining to work with other priests, and in fact publicly denouncing one by name. This had clearly become an unworkable situation since Father had obviously decided to go his own way. We wish Father Starbuck well and thank him for the years he has spent with us.”
I believe that a response is in order. First of all, I did state to the PPA/OLHC Board that I would not work under another “pastor.” Is there anything wrong with that? That is not insubordination, it is my priestly right. The following statement “nor would he take any good faith advice from the Board” is unintelligible to me, since it is ambiguous and open to more than one meaning. Are they saying ‘that’ I told them that I would not take good faith advice? I did not. Or are they saying that I would (or that I did) not in fact take good faith advice? If they are saying that they had rendered “good faith advice,” to my memory none was never offered. And if it had been, I would have done my best to hear them out. Moreover, their statement that “Father had obviously decided to go his own way,” is not accurate. I had made no such decision, and had told them that, minimally, I wanted to see the situation through to the end of the year, and that I would consider working with them into the indefinite future. I felt that that was the least I could do for the good people of this parish. But instead, on December 23 one member of the Board called me to tell me that I was “on vacation” that weekend and that if I were to appear on church property I would be considered to be “trespassing” and would “be arrested.” (That is the last and final communication that I received from the board.) Because another schedule was later posted on the church website with other celebrants for my Masses (and given the previous threat), I did not return. They later sent the contents of my mail bin home to me, which included outgoing items, with no explanation. Moreover, this same Board continues to tell people that I am on a leave of absence. And perhaps most strikingly, I was never given any notice of termination. So far as I know, maybe I am still employed by OLHC.
They state that I refused to work with other priests. When? They state that I had denounced one by name. When? My criticism on December 19 was not of the priest. My criticism was of the Board for not doing their job to vet priests in the time that I have served this parish. And regarding “Monsignor’s stipulation,” what on earth are they talking about? I was never given any stipulation. Moreover, their tone seems to imply that I am an employee who is answerable to them in the same way other employees are answerable to employers. The same member of the Board, cited above, himself admitted to me that he did not know what I spent all my time doing as a priest (i.e., what a priest’s duties are). Is it not obvious that this Board does not know what a priest does, especially when they have not made one good policy decision since Fr. Perez died? And they have been responsible for numerous misrepresentations of the truth (may I call them lies?). For example, when did Sister Taddeo “return to Korea”? This statement in the January 2 Sunday bulletin was very hurtful to Sister Taddeo, as she faithfully attends Mass now in my chapel and has, indeed, not left the country. And where was the compassion for this Sister who had served this parish for at least ten years in cutting off her rent at the end of December (at Christmas), especially when I had negotiated a continuing rental fee well below market value, retaining a month-to-month agreement with the property manager? This treatment of a religious Sister at this time following the death of Fr. Perez was a heartless calculated decision that saw dollar signs and not human hearts.
Further, I would be remiss in not noting how disappointed Fr. Perez would be with the introduction of the 1962 Roman Missal at OLHC. How much time over the years did he spend criticizing that Missal from the pulpit? He must, indeed, be saddened by this development (even from the grave).
And I want to say that as an independent priest, I have owed no one anything in my ministry at OLHC over the course of this past 15 years. It has all been gratis. And if the situation had been workable with the Board, I would have stayed for at least another 20 years. But I want to be clear in stating that if I had left at any time over the course of my tenure, that would have been my right and my decision to make. I owed no one anything. And it is in that same spirit that I continue my ministry here locally in serving those who seek my ministry, my teaching, and my sacraments.
Finally, one wonders why they will not produce the docuмent they cite. Would Fr. Perez have cogently signed such a docuмent? Regardless, it should be noted that the Catholic Church is not governed by laypeople, nor can it be. The situation of having a priest answering to laypeople is simply not workable, nor could they have ecclesial authority or jurisdiction to elect a “pastor.” They don’t understand his priestly duties, his obligations, Canon law, and certainly not his limitations as a human being. As it was, they were just posting or sending out anonymously written schedules expecting us to jump at their whim. I did not know who was writing what.
Lastly, please let me state that I wish everyone well, including those who stay at OLHC. I have been telling people that I am tired of all the stirrings, and simply want to move forward peaceably. If the Board of PPA/OLHC had handled things better, then they would not feel the need to continue blaming me for their own incompetence. I, therefore, ask them to make better decisions for the parishioners of OLHC, and to accept responsibility for their own decisions."
In our Lord,
Fr. Starbuck
Holy Priest, Father Starbuck.
-
Sorry about the inadvertent duplicate postings :confused:
-
Liers!! The OLHC website said "“Father had obviously decided to go his own way,” What!! Dispicable Liers!! The regular usher at the 7:30 a.m. Mass on Sundays was JOEL IDDINGS. He is the one who called Father Starbuck before Christmas and told Father he was not to say any further Masses Christmas weekend. He further threatened Father that if Father showed up on OLHC grounds he would personally see to it that Father be arrested for trespassing!!!
-
Liers!! The OLHC website said "“Father had obviously decided to go his own way,” What!! Dispicable Liers!! The regular usher at the 7:30 a.m. Mass on Sundays was JOEL IDDINGS. He is the one who called Father Starbuck before Christmas and told Father he was not to say any further Masses Christmas weekend. He further threatened Father that if Father showed up on OLHC grounds he would personally see to it that Father be arrested for trespassing!!!
Same thing happened to Sister A, but it was Fr. Starbuck who told her not to come back or she would be arrested for trespassing.
Regardless, I pray for Fr. Starbuck and am grateful God has blessed him with perseverance in his vocation and diligence to the Faithful. Fr. Starbuck has been good to my family.
-
Is this unusual?
EVERY time I have asked an SSPX priest to hear my confession when it is not "confession time" I have been refused. Didn't matter which priest. They all refused. Same thing about blessing articles. If they're not "on the table" so the priest can do many items at one time at his leisure, you're out of luck.
It seems to me that Fr. Starbuck, doing the work of 3 priests when Fr. Perez had just died, was blessed by God with fortitude and perseverance for the faithful. It seems he was blessed with humility, too.
You need to get to confession on time.
-
I see that the beat goes on and the cowards that write this nonsense will still not show their names or just name. They like to mention names of OLHC but their own names, why not?
I remember the Monsignor doing the work of 3 priests for many a year. I remember Fr. Sretenovic doing much work at OLHC including the St. Philomena devotions and the various other masses outside the normal schedule. I remember Fr. Starbuck doing a 6:15 am Sunday mass for a short time and also being going for a long time on medical issues. However, Fr. Starbuck stating or his allies stating that he did the work of 3 priests after the Monsignor died is utter and complete nonsense. He shut down the chapel, he did not have any sacraments to do or give. Mass was not started up until 2-3 weeks after the Monsignor died. I will gladly admit that when it did start up Fr. Starbuck started showing up at 6:30 like the other priests had (for the 7:30 Mass) for confessions which was a nice surprise and gave us time to go to confession.
I was there at the 7:30 Mass on December 19 and to state he did not criticize any priest is an outright lie as he mentioned Fr. Wiest by name and said he had a private investigator check him out. I wonder where the funds came to be had to have a private investigator look into Fr. Wiest. As over the 15 years of Fr. Starbuck's residency he was the only priest that ever talked about money as in not having any health insurance or regarding car repairs or something else. Fr. Starbuck directly mentioned Fr. Wiest by name and, unless, he wants to play philosophical word games and say Fr. Wiest is not a priest and, thereby, he did not speak of any priest, then he did speak of Fr. Wiest.
I would appeal to Father Starbuck to remember he is a priest and stop these one-sided verbal "ventings" that he and his followers are conducting. One day you will regret the things you have said and the blackening of good peoples' names. Again, by your fruits you will know them. If the demons have entered OLHC like some of the more disturbed writers stated then OLHC will collapse and if the Holy Ghost is with St. Dominic's Chapel then it will thrive. It is as simple as that and the continual ravings will do nothing but diminish your work. Have you noticed that I appear to be the only one from the OLHC parish that responds to the ravings? The majority of the people there are much more charitable than I am.
-
cera - as powerful as the rosary is, that place still needs an exorcism. It's that bad.
100% agree.
-
So, Michael Yoder, you think that Wiest is a real priest? How do you know this?
-
The thread on Fr. Wiest and the Buddha altar went up on CI months ago. I think a background on just about anyone could be conducted fairly easily with the proper authorities, and then the information released to the public. This should only take a few days, why is this taking so long? Either Wiest is a priest, or he is not. This question should already be answered by now.
-
The thread on Fr. Wiest and the Buddha altar went up on CI months ago. I think a background on just about anyone could be conducted fairly easily with the proper authorities, and then the information released to the public. This should only take a few days, why is this taking so long? Either Wiest is a priest, or he is not. This question should already be answered by now.
To answer your question, it was difficult to do a background check because Wiest (although he wanted to work alone with altar boys and by CA state law was required to have a background check) repeatedly refused to show his drivers’ license and also repeatedly refused to show his ordination papers.
For unknown reasons, the school board has continually assisted his stonewalling. When Father Perez directed Father Starbuck to follow up with the school board on the background check, all hell broke lose. The venom of three of the four school board members was directed at Father Starbuck for carrying out the request of Father Perez.
It does not make any sense at all unless something evil is involved.
Eventually a background check was done (this was mentioned by Father Starbuck in his recent response to the school board’s latest attack on him). As Father Starbuck pointed out, the investigation revealed that no such person as Father Michael Wiest has ever existed.
However a photo of the person who calls himself Father Michael Wiest was published in a newspaper (available here on Cath Info) presenting himself as a layman who owned an antique store. The news item showed his photo, a photo of an antique Buddha, an antique Chinese table and an antique Chinese screen. These were similar to, but not the exact Buddah, antique Chinese table and antique Chinese screen in the photo of his Buddhist altar.
It is clear that it is an altar for pagan worship due to the items that typically are on such an altar, the white candles, the fresh flower and the antique mirror for communicating with the dead. These items put to be the lie that his Buddha was a ”family heirloom” or “museum piece”.
You say
Either Wiest is a priest, or he is not.
The possibilities include:
1. He is not a priest, which explains all the problems above. But this option fails to explain how well he knows his way around the altar.
2. He is a priest, but he was ordained under another name which he wants to keep hidden.
Under this option is the possibility that he is Bishop Fulham who supposedly died in November 18, 2017 or November 19, 2017. He looks like Fulham (photos of Fulham are on CathInfo) and this explains why he knows he way so well around the altar. At the time he “died” Fulham was dealing with scandal of being known to have married a nun and fathered children with her. He had also been criticized for harboring known pederast Father Marshall Roberts.
For more info on pederast Marshall Robers and the SSJ see this link: https://www.theinquiry.ca/wordpress/rc-scandal/other-countries/u-s-a/background-article-on-the-society-of-st-john/
Father Marshall Roberts, a founder of the suppressed and scandal-ridden Society of St. John (formerly under the jurisdiction of the Diocese of Scranton, Pa.) is currently the chaplain of St. Michael the Archangel Roman Catholic Church in Jacksonville, Fla.
St. Michael the Archangel Roman Catholic Church was an independent chapel owned operated by “Bishop” Fulham.
Also of the interest is a group called “Friends of St. Michael the Archangel Chapel” which did not cash out their large amount of funds until December 2020. This is odd because that’s almost three years after the purported “death” of “Bishop” Fulham, who owned the chapel.
Working from the news item on Mr. Wiest’s antique store, if you do a reverse phone look-up of the Mr, Wiest’s phone number which is given in the news article, you will find that Mr. Wiest came into a large amount of money at some time prior to January of 2021, when he bought properties in Hawaii, Arizona, Illinois and Michigan.
January 2021 is also when Mr. Wiest first arrived at OLHC. When he had been at the chapel only 3 weeks, he began spreading lies about Father Starbuck and was telling chapel members “We need to get rid of Father Starbuck.” That’s when some of us asked WTF???
Again, none of this makes any sense unless something evil is involved.
-
Hey! Yoder! "Tough Guy" a.k.a. Benedict Arnold, Betrayer, Not "Always Faithful"
I'm so angry with your cunning misrepresentations innuendos and YOUR outright lies! Despite your self-righteous indignation and judgemental posturing the faithful have a right, when they see injustice done to a Holy Priest, to appropriately express their thoughts & feelings! Your attempted suppression and shutting down of individuals feelings & opinions (by calling people names) is not what a self-proclaimed upright Catholic man should be doing! Don't you think?
You wrote: "He [Father Starbuck] shut down the chapel, he did not have any sacraments to do or give. Mass was not started up until 2-3 weeks after the Monsignor died."
Your deliberate choice of innuendo laced words describing Father as "shut[ing] down"and "he did not have any sacraments to do or give" implies an irresponsible shirking of duty by Father. Despite your attack here on Father's faithfulness to his OLHC You know better! The truth was there was a number Covid infections of people (like Father Perez and "Fr. Weist (who were both hospitalized), the alter boy and others, Father not knowing how pervasive the threat was in the chapel, took the most prudent of precautions to keep the rest of the faithful safe by asking we delay services until we got a grip of what happening at OLHC. Of course, you knew that this was the real reason didn't you?
You've also stated that you have been at OLHC since 2006! Therefore, all these 15 years you have received from Father Starbuck the Most Holy Body and Blood Of Our Lord and Savior Jesus from his most holy consecrated hands, didn't you? You sat and received all the graces from Father Starbuck's sermons and sacraments. You probably also received from Father in confession the forgiveness of your sins, didn't you? And NOW, you betray Father with your attacks on him and that makes YOU indeed the reprehensible "Coward" for not protecting the priest who gave you the "Living Bread" of our Lord for 15 years! Shame on you "tough guy." Because Father served YOU for 15 years you should have been "always faithful" to Father (your priest for 15 years). Now, sadly, you've failed in that regard!
Despite what appears to be your devotion, Our Lord and His Blessed Mother sees your hostility to the Truth and your intimidating efforts to shut down free-speech on this thread regarding the questionable status/legitimacy of this Usurper! That will not happen "Tough guy!"
-
To answer your question, it was difficult to do a background check because Wiest (although he wanted to work alone with altar boys and by CA state law was required to have a background check) repeatedly refused to show his drivers’ license and also repeatedly refused to show his ordination papers.
For unknown reasons, the school board has continually assisted his stonewalling. When Father Perez directed Father Starbuck to follow up with the school board on the background check, all hell broke lose. The venom of three of the four school board members was directed at Father Starbuck for carrying out the request of Father Perez.
It does not make any sense at all unless something evil is involved.
Eventually a background check was done (this was mentioned by Father Starbuck in his recent response to the school board’s latest attack on him). As Father Starbuck pointed out, the investigation revealed that no such person as Father Michael Wiest has ever existed.
However a photo of the person who calls himself Father Michael Wiest was published in a newspaper (available here on Cath Info) presenting himself as a layman who owned an antique store. The news item showed his photo, a photo of an antique Buddha, an antique Chinese table and an antique Chinese screen. These were similar to, but not the exact Buddah, antique Chinese table and antique Chinese screen in the photo of his Buddhist altar.
It is clear that it is an altar for pagan worship due to the items that typically are on such an altar, the white candles, the fresh flower and the antique mirror for communicating with the dead. These items put to be the lie that his Buddha was a ”family heirloom” or “museum piece”.
You say
Either Wiest is a priest, or he is not.
The possibilities include:
1. He is not a priest, which explains all the problems above. But this option fails to explain how well he knows his way around the altar.
2. He is a priest, but he was ordained under another name which he wants to keep hidden.
Under this option is the possibility that he is Bishop Fulham who supposedly died in November 18, 2017 or November 19, 2017. He looks like Fulham (photos of Fulham are on CathInfo) and this explains why he knows he way so well around the altar. At the time he “died” Fulham was dealing with scandal of being known to have married a nun and fathered children with her. He had also been criticized for harboring known pederast Father Marshall Roberts.
For more info on pederast Marshall Robers and the SSJ see this link: https://www.theinquiry.ca/wordpress/rc-scandal/other-countries/u-s-a/background-article-on-the-society-of-st-john/
Father Marshall Roberts, a founder of the suppressed and scandal-ridden Society of St. John (formerly under the jurisdiction of the Diocese of Scranton, Pa.) is currently the chaplain of St. Michael the Archangel Roman Catholic Church in Jacksonville, Fla.
St. Michael the Archangel Roman Catholic Church was an independent chapel owned operated by “Bishop” Fulham.
Also of the interest is a group called “Friends of St. Michael the Archangel Chapel” which did not cash out their large amount of funds until December 2020. This is odd because that’s almost three years after the purported “death” of “Bishop” Fulham, who owned the chapel.
Working from the news item on Mr. Wiest’s antique store, if you do a reverse phone look-up of the Mr, Wiest’s phone number which is given in the news article, you will find that Mr. Wiest came into a large amount of money at some time prior to January of 2021, when he bought properties in Hawaii, Arizona, Illinois and Michigan.
January 2021 is also when Mr. Wiest first arrived at OLHC. When he had been at the chapel only 3 weeks, he began spreading lies about Father Starbuck and was telling chapel members “We need to get rid of Father Starbuck.” That’s when some of us asked WTF???
Again, none of this makes any sense unless something evil is involved.
I am in error. No background check was able to be done because Mr. Wiest adamantly refused to submit his drivers license. A background check would also necessitate him giving his fingerprints. That a background check became an impossibility.
What I intended to say is that Wiest was investigated and it was found that no such person as Father Michael Wiest ever existed.
-
To answer your question, it was difficult to do a background check because Wiest (although he wanted to work alone with altar boys and by CA state law was required to have a background check) repeatedly refused to show his drivers’ license and also repeatedly refused to show his ordination papers.
For unknown reasons, the school board has continually assisted his stonewalling. When Father Perez directed Father Starbuck to follow up with the school board on the background check, all hell broke lose. The venom of three of the four school board members was directed at Father Starbuck for carrying out the request of Father Perez.
It does not make any sense at all unless something evil is involved.
Eventually a background check was done (this was mentioned by Father Starbuck in his recent response to the school board’s latest attack on him). As Father Starbuck pointed out, the investigation revealed that no such person as Father Michael Wiest has ever existed.
However a photo of the person who calls himself Father Michael Wiest was published in a newspaper (available here on Cath Info) presenting himself as a layman who owned an antique store. The news item showed his photo, a photo of an antique Buddha, an antique Chinese table and an antique Chinese screen. These were similar to, but not the exact Buddah, antique Chinese table and antique Chinese screen in the photo of his Buddhist altar.
It is clear that it is an altar for pagan worship due to the items that typically are on such an altar, the white candles, the fresh flower and the antique mirror for communicating with the dead. These items put to be the lie that his Buddha was a ”family heirloom” or “museum piece”.
You say
Either Wiest is a priest, or he is not.
The possibilities include:
1. He is not a priest, which explains all the problems above. But this option fails to explain how well he knows his way around the altar.
2. He is a priest, but he was ordained under another name which he wants to keep hidden.
Under this option is the possibility that he is Bishop Fulham who supposedly died in November 18, 2017 or November 19, 2017. He looks like Fulham (photos of Fulham are on CathInfo) and this explains why he knows he way so well around the altar. At the time he “died” Fulham was dealing with scandal of being known to have married a nun and fathered children with her. He had also been criticized for harboring known pederast Father Marshall Roberts.
For more info on pederast Marshall Robers and the SSJ see this link: https://www.theinquiry.ca/wordpress/rc-scandal/other-countries/u-s-a/background-article-on-the-society-of-st-john/
Father Marshall Roberts, a founder of the suppressed and scandal-ridden Society of St. John (formerly under the jurisdiction of the Diocese of Scranton, Pa.) is currently the chaplain of St. Michael the Archangel Roman Catholic Church in Jacksonville, Fla.
St. Michael the Archangel Roman Catholic Church was an independent chapel owned operated by “Bishop” Fulham.
Also of the interest is a group called “Friends of St. Michael the Archangel Chapel” which did not cash out their large amount of funds until December 2020. This is odd because that’s almost three years after the purported “death” of “Bishop” Fulham, who owned the chapel.
Working from the news item on Mr. Wiest’s antique store, if you do a reverse phone look-up of the Mr, Wiest’s phone number which is given in the news article, you will find that Mr. Wiest came into a large amount of money at some time prior to January of 2021, when he bought properties in Hawaii, Arizona, Illinois and Michigan.
January 2021 is also when Mr. Wiest first arrived at OLHC. When he had been at the chapel only 3 weeks, he began spreading lies about Father Starbuck and was telling chapel members “We need to get rid of Father Starbuck.” That’s when some of us asked WTF???
Again, none of this makes any sense unless something evil is involved.
Very good post.
are you sure Marshall Roberts is in Jacksonville FL?
I ask because last I read he was in AZ working at one of Pfeiffer's congregations.
-
I am in error. No background check was able to be done because Mr. Wiest adamantly refused to submit his drivers license. A background check would also necessitate him giving his fingerprints. That a background check became an impossibility.
What I intended to say is that Wiest was investigated and it was found that no such person as Father Michael Wiest ever existed.
If I was told that my priest did not exist, I would be concerned and look into those claims. Why are some people upset that others are concerned about something this serious? It is baffling.
-
Very good post.
are you sure Marshall Roberts is in Jacksonville FL?
I ask because last I read he was in AZ working at one of Pfeiffer's congregations.
You are correct, he is now in AZ and I believe a Florida Bishop is looking for him. The information linked was that at that time he was in the Jacksonville area being hidden by Father "Bishop" Fulham (who may or may not be Mr. Wiest).
-
If I was told that my priest did not exist, I would be concerned and look into those claims. Why are some people upset that others are concerned about something this serious? It is baffling.
Carissima, you are 100% right.
Father Perez (who had not vetted Wiest himself) asked Father Starbuck to look into why Wiest had not been vetted by the school board.
When Father Starbuck did so, he was mercilessly attacked by 3 of the 4 school board members. They spread lies about him.
As you may have read, one member of the school board yanked open the confessional door DURING confessions and yelled at our good and humble priest to NOT repeat the sermon he'd just given at the 7:30 Mass.
For good measure, the same school board member then unplugged Father's microphone so no one could hear the sermon.
To top it off, someone stopped the live-streaming of that Mass.
What was in that sermon? The request for the school board to properly vet Wiest.
What on earth is going on?
Why won't Wiest show his drivers' license?
Why won't Wiest show his papers of ordination?
Why won't Wiest say when and where he was ordained and by whom and in what rite?
Upon the untimely death of Father Perez, Father Starbuck had every intention of continuing to serve OLHC faithfully as he has done for 15 years.
Yet on Dec. 23 he was abruptly told he would no longer be saying Christmas Masses. He was also told that he was on "vacation" and that if he came on the grounds he would be arrested for trespassing.
To top it off, a person was sent by the school board to ask him to come onto the grounds because he "needed to get something" out of Father Starbuck's office.
(In other words, he was being set up to go onto the grounds so he could be arrested for trespassing).
Lovely behavior for devout Catholics, right?
Through all of this (and much more) Father Starbuck has been of model of humility, charity, patience and good will. He has shown all of us how to deal with unfair attacks, lies and calumny.
He now has so many former members of OLHC fleeing to his chapel that he is praying about adding a third Mass.
Please join us in saying a 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for his protection, provision and guidance, and for the rot to be removed from OLHC (of which I've been a supporting member since the 1990s).
-
Just when I thought I had this all figured out, another twist to the story - This "connection" to Fr. Fulham needs to be dug into. I always thought it strange the Wiest knew the Mass so perfectly when he obviously didn't or couldn't have had much training.
-
I don't understand why the controversy still exists? If the board wants a fake "Fr" Weist, and if they kicked out Fr Starbuck, and he has found a new chapel, then time to move on. Nothing is going to get reconciled and Fr Starbuck is probably better off independent. Blessing in disguise.
-
There's a school connected to this church so the battle should go on until they finally decide about Wiest - is he or is he not a priest? I don't see that anything has been settled.
-
There's a school connected to this church so the battle should go on until they finally decide about Wiest - is he or is he not a priest? I don't see that anything has been settled.
It seems that those in opposition to Fr. Starbuck don't care if Wiest is a real priest or not. It's quite bizarre.
-
It seems that those in opposition to Fr. Starbuck don't care if Wiest is a real priest or not. It's quite bizarre.
It boggles the mind that this matter seems to be of no interest to the board. If he's not a real priest, his Masses are invalid and his absolutions in confession null and void. "Ecclesia supplet" doesn't apply here. You have a chapel there chock full of traditional Catholics and they're not bothered by the seriousness of this issue?? Doesn't make sense, especially since it can be so easily cleared up. But now I understand a lot of people have already left and gone over to Fr. Starbuck, who most certainly is a real priest with a real history of seminary and ordination.
What a mess!
-
I agree with you, Meg & pre1962 - it is bizarre & a terrible mess. Mind boggling. It's in need of an exorcism - it's that bad - downright sacrilegious to have some of those men saying "Mass". What is that Board thinking?!
-
OLHC has been a mess for a long time. I could foresee this coming from the first time I set foot in that place.
-
Bottom line is this! After all this time spent here in seeking the truth about this man, Mr. Michael Wiese, and getting nowhere, I now feel, and am calling for, that this man should be investigated and interrogated by the authorities, namely the Garden Grove Police! My reasoning is this: There is a term police and the authorities use when deciding to investigate or question a suspicious person for any kind of possible criminal activity and that term is "probable cause." It is my opinion, I feel that there is enough "probable cause" here with Michael Wiese and that he should be questioned and asked to show his driver's license to the police for the following reasons:
I would certainly argue that this man's behavior of refusing to show his driver's license revealing who he is and his history and background is certainly SUSPICIOUS!
1 - Here is a man who desires to interact with children yet when asked to show his drivers license HE ADAMANTLY REFUSED TO DO SO!! WHY? Isn't that a "red flag?" Shouldn't that bother the parents of Padre Pio Academy at OLHC? Shouldn't they be up in arms that this man refuses to show his license and chooses not to give ANY information regarding where he was as a priest before coming to OLHC? If I had children at Padre Pio Academy I would demand that. Where was he ordained? What bishop ordained him? What seminary did he attend? THERE IS NO ABSOLUTELY INFORMATION AVAILABLE ABOUT THIS MAN AT ALL! Why isn't there a mass rebellion and outcry with to find out the reasons why this man refuses to show docuмentation about himself (particularly from OLHC parents who have children in the school) and the OLHC faithful who are very smart educated traditionalists. What is wrong with them that they continue to go to OLHC and not question "The Board" and demanding to know the due diligence proof, docuмentation and history of this man?
2. There does not exist nor is there ANY information on any background check services for an individual named "Michael Wiese." Check it yourself! The is NO information and nothing comes up AT ALL with this man's name in the most powerful search engine GOOGLE! WHY?
3. Why doesn't the "Board" want to know anything of the background of this man particularly for the reasons that if, in the end, it turns out that he is not a priest that they would be legally and grossly liable. In addition, they would be considered an "accesory" for providing "cover" for this man for failing and refusing to do due deligence on him and deliberately blocking any effort to legitimately seek proof of his identity as a priest!
The mystery is that he says all the right things from pulpit thus appearing to be legitimate and he definitely knows his way around the alter and the Mass BUT he will not reveal where he was as a priest previously! Doesn't this bother anyone else? In addition, he has been grossly abusive, viously angry, uncharitable, back-biting and hateful towards Fr. Starbuck! Why is that? This does not integrate with the way he presents himself on the alter podium as a nice, gentle, all-wise, advise giving and charitable "priest"?
By the way, how would the faithful of OLHC feel if it turns out this man indeed is not an ordained priest and that they have been going to confession to him and have been duped into believing that they have been receiving the Body & Blood of Christ, only find out that this man is a scam? I know how I would feel. I have gone to confession to him and thought I was receiving a valid sacraments from him. If I found out that I was scammed, I would be outraged and repulsed that I was duped by this man and the OLHC Board! If that turned out to be the case, I feel a class action suit from all the faithful of OLHC to this man and "The Board" would be in order. Lastly, I ask that if anyone who is reading this thread and is a police officer or knows a person in authority can possibly respond and advise this tread if they feel that there is "probable cause" here.
Of course, God knows the truth and I am just expressing my opinions and legitimate questions here.
Lastly, If I am in fact wrong here and am shown the facts with solid evidence that I'm wrong, I would humbly and willingly achnowledged that to be the case and I would attempt to seek Christ-like harmony and peace to all involved. I just want the Truth!
-
Just to clarify once again, the name is spelled WiesT, not Weist or Wiese.
Michael WIEST.
There was a post on one of the Wiest threads that suggested he might actually be 'Bishop' Fulham, who supposedly died a few years ago but could have simply vanished. Some thought Wiest looked "a lot" like Fulham, of whom there are only a few photos on the internet. I looked at those photos and Wiest looks only a little like Fulham, not "a lot". There's a bit of a resemblance. The photos that are on the other threads of Wiest in the antique shop in Michigan (from I think 2015) leave no doubt that THAT person is the same one that's currently at OLHC.
-
and he says mass at an ALTAR. Alter means 'to change'. Also, if you looked up Wiese & not Wiest then of course you won't anything about Wiest.
-
Bottom line is this! After all this time spent here in seeking the truth about this man, Mr. Michael Wiese, and getting nowhere, I now feel, and am calling for, that this man should be investigated and interrogated by the authorities, namely the Garden Grove Police! My reasoning is this: There is a term police and the authorities use when deciding to investigate or question a suspicious person for any kind of possible criminal activity and that term is "probable cause." It is my opinion, I feel that there is enough "probable cause" here with Michael Wiese and that he should be questioned and asked to show his driver's license to the police for the following reasons:
I would certainly argue that this man's behavior of refusing to show his driver's license revealing who he is and his history and background is certainly SUSPICIOUS!
1 - Here is a man who desires to interact with children yet when asked to show his drivers license HE ADAMANTLY REFUSED TO DO SO!! WHY? Isn't that a "red flag?" Shouldn't that bother the parents of Padre Pio Academy at OLHC? Shouldn't they be up in arms that this man refuses to show his license and chooses not to give ANY information regarding where he was as a priest before coming to OLHC? If I had children at Padre Pio Academy I would demand that. Where was he ordained? What bishop ordained him? What seminary did he attend? THERE IS NO ABSOLUTELY INFORMATION AVAILABLE ABOUT THIS MAN AT ALL! Why isn't there a mass rebellion and outcry with to find out the reasons why this man refuses to show docuмentation about himself (particularly from OLHC parents who have children in the school) and the OLHC faithful who are very smart educated traditionalists. What is wrong with them that they continue to go to OLHC and not question "The Board" and demanding to know the due diligence proof, docuмentation and history of this man?
2. There does not exist nor is there ANY information on any background check services for an individual named "Michael Wiese." Check it yourself! The is NO information and nothing comes up AT ALL with this man's name in the most powerful search engine GOOGLE! WHY?
3. Why doesn't the "Board" want to know anything of the background of this man particularly for the reasons that if, in the end, it turns out that he is not a priest that they would be legally and grossly liable. In addition, they would be considered an "accesory" for providing "cover" for this man for failing and refusing to do due deligence on him and deliberately blocking any effort to legitimately seek proof of his identity as a priest!
The mystery is that he says all the right things from pulpit thus appearing to be legitimate and he definitely knows his way around the alter and the Mass BUT he will not reveal where he was as a priest previously! Doesn't this bother anyone else? In addition, he has been grossly abusive, viously angry, uncharitable, back-biting and hateful towards Fr. Starbuck! Why is that? This does not integrate with the way he presents himself on the alter podium as a nice, gentle, all-wise, advise giving and charitable "priest"?
By the way, how would the faithful of OLHC feel if it turns out this man indeed is not an ordained priest and that they have been going to confession to him and have been duped into believing that they have been receiving the Body & Blood of Christ, only find out that this man is a scam? I know how I would feel. I have gone to confession to him and thought I was receiving a valid sacraments from him. If I found out that I was scammed, I would be outraged and repulsed that I was duped by this man and the OLHC Board! If that turned out to be the case, I feel a class action suit from all the faithful of OLHC to this man and "The Board" would be in order. Lastly, I ask that if anyone who is reading this thread and is a police officer or knows a person in authority can possibly respond and advise this tread if they feel that there is "probable cause" here.
Of course, God knows the truth and I am just expressing my opinions and legitimate questions here.
Lastly, If I am in fact wrong here and am shown the facts with solid evidence that I'm wrong, I would humbly and willingly achnowledged that to be the case and I would attempt to seek Christ-like harmony and peace to all involved. I just want the Truth!
I have read on many threads that it is illegal in CA for someone to work with children at a school and not go through a background check.
If this is the case, it seems to me that a simple call to the school authorities would suffice to put the heat on. Wiest might even run for the hills if they start investigating him.
The fact that the board is not vetting him, as they are morally and legally required to do, indicates to me that they either know something we don't or they don't give a rip.
However, Fr. Perez, God rest his soul, has always had the attitude that if someone presents himself as a priest then you have to accept him as a priest until you can prove he's not a priest, like Croisette, or not a priest who should be publicly presenting himself as a priest, like Colletti. So, if Wiest refuses to "show his papers" and there is little info on him online, how do you prove anything? Wiest seems to know this and is taking advantage of it.
The school board needs to step up to the plate and protect the children under their care. Everyone with children in the school should remove their children until such time as the school board vets Wiest AND publishes the information.
One, and I mean one, incident against a child is enough to destroy many lives.
-
Excellent posts, Cera, Epiphany, Thorn, Pre1962 and others!
Now we are getting somewhere... we are to stay focused here.. and stick to the essential issue which is: "Weist! Show us your drivers license and proof that you have a history of being a priest all these past years before OLHC!"
Also, there has been over a 1,000 views on this thread! Surely there is someone who has viewed this thread and who is or who knows someone that is connected to the State School Authorities that could advise on how to proceed?
Also, Epiphany wrote this:
The school board needs to step up to the plate and protect the children under their care. Everyone with children in the school should remove their children until such time as the school board vets Wiest AND publishes the information.
Excellent!! If I had children in Padre Pio Academy I would do this exactly until I get answers!
-
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.
-
Go visit the Garden Grove police. Simple as.
-
John Felton, can you tell us when you first came to OLHC & how was it a mess?
-
Can someone tell me if "Fr." Wiest has the same car as posted in the following thread:
https://www.cathinfo.com/anonymous-posts-allowed/more-weirdness-from-fr-michael-wiest-at-olhc/msg800360/#msg800360
And what traditional Catholic bishop may have been performing ordinations in Rome, in 1997:
https://www.cathinfo.com/anonymous-posts-allowed/more-weirdness-from-fr-michael-wiest-at-olhc/msg800370/#msg800370
The 2nd anonymous post is mine, as well.
-
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 (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?
-
BTW - Alert - Click the picture at the bottom of my previous post to see it enlarged.
-
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??
-
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?
-
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(https://www.cde.ca.gov/images/icons/externallink.gif) (http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=EDC§ionNum=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
-
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 (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!
-
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
-
It's the second of 5 photos...
-
“He’s got the best rhubarb. I buy from him every year,” said customer Michael Wiest.
-
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.
-
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
-
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?
-
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 (https://www.statopontificio.org/), 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. (https://www.anglicanritecatholicchurch.org/intangible_cultural_heritage.html)
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
While Wiest may have SOME info about him on the internet, he has ZERO public info about him as a priest, outside of videos of Masses at OLHC. The only searchable occurrences of the word "priest" are in these threads on this site. Tracing his 'history', the only thing that can be found is his ownership of antique shops in Michigan featuring Chinese and Buddhist stuff, and something about a possible Buddhist altar in his house. That history goes from about 2008 to at least 2015, and presumedly beyond that. He appeared at OLHC in early 2021. There's also multiple email addresses and physical locations that may or not belong to him.
A couple of photos, and that's it.
At this point I don't know if we'll ever learn the truth. It's up to the chapel board to fix this if it needs fixing. Maybe he's really a priest, the board knows it, and refuses to release any details. It's up to the chapel families who are concerned to demand answers. I'm not a parishioner but as a traditional Catholic who knows people who go there, I'm concerned.
-
While Wiest may have SOME info about him on the internet, he has ZERO public info about him as a priest, outside of videos of Masses at OLHC. The only searchable occurrences of the word "priest" are in these threads on this site. Tracing his 'history', the only thing that can be found is his ownership of antique shops in Michigan featuring Chinese and Buddhist stuff, and something about a possible Buddhist altar in his house. That history goes from about 2008 to at least 2015, and presumedly beyond that. He appeared at OLHC in early 2021. There's also multiple email addresses and physical locations that may or not belong to him.
A couple of photos, and that's it.
At this point I don't know if we'll ever learn the truth. It's up to the chapel board to fix this if it needs fixing. Maybe he's really a priest, the board knows it, and refuses to release any details. It's up to the chapel families who are concerned to demand answers. I'm not a parishioner but as a traditional Catholic who knows people who go there, I'm concerned.
agreed.
- a priest must have a public life.
- any priest who won't provide his lineage is a priest to run away from.
My extended family left OLHC, after having been there 38 years, when Fr. Perez introduced Croisette from the pulpit, failed to mention Croisette was a "deacon" by the hand of "fr./b" Pfeiffer, and then let Croisette distribute Holy Communion.
It can also be up to concerned Faithful at OLHC to do their due diligence and call CA school authorities for advice on how to proceed regarding Wiest who has not had a background check yet deals with children.
Maybe also contact old neighbors from his MI days (listed in one of the background check links somewhere here) and ask if they knew anything his being a priest.
I contacted all his relatives (listed on that same page) and only one replied: "f*** off!"
His father, Norman Wiest, is listed. He is still alive. Maybe call or write to him?
EVERY parent of EVERY child at that school should keep their child/children home and EVERY Faithful needs to go elsewhere for sacraments until Wiest's credentials are made public.
-
Subject: "Epiphany's" response to this quote:
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.
Absolutely correct "Epiphany!"
Father Starbuck pleaded with Fr. Perez to have "Fr." Weist vetted! All the time Weist was here, FATHER PEREZ, DESPITE SOME HALF-HEARTED EFFORT, IN THE END... DID NOTHING TO ENSURE WIEST WAS VETTED, WHY?!!!
-
Wiest's parents are both deceased, refer to the other thread a few pages back. Their estate owns his listed address in Phoenix.
-
Father Starbuck pleaded with Fr. Perez to have "Fr." Weist vetted! All the time Weist was here, FATHER PEREZ, DESPITE SOME HALF-HEARTED EFFORT, IN THE END... DID NOTHING TO ENSURE WIEST WAS VETTED, WHY?!!!
Fr. Perez assumed any man who presented himself as a priest WAS a priest until proven otherwise.
Fr. Perez clearly had little control over the school board, so it seems he would leave the vetting for the school to the school board.
-
It wouldn't be the school board's responsibility to vet a priest. That would have been Fr. Perez's responsibility.
-
It wouldn't be the school board's responsibility to vet a priest. That would have been Fr. Perez's responsibility.
OLHC isn’t a parish run by a diocese or priestly order, it appears the place is run by a board made up of laypersons. If they hire a priest it would not matter how long he has worked with them, he would not be given the authority to make decisions just because he is a priest.
-
As I understand it, Fr Shell handed the property over to laypersons before he died? If those people own the property, then they would choose the priest that works for them, no? When would an independent priest come and take over a chapel or church already run by others? Just trying to clarify…
-
Fr. Schell didn't own the property so he couldn't have handed it over to the Board. A group of lay people used to meet in a gym to say Mass with Fr. Schell. Fr. Schell was a retired Jesuit that they had begged to provide them with the TLM which he did. So the property was always owned by the lay people.
-
As I understand it, Fr Shell handed the property over to laypersons before he died? If those people own the property, then they would choose the priest that works for them, no? When would an independent priest come and take over a chapel or church already run by others? Just trying to clarify…
Wrong! You wrote: When would an independent priest come and take over a chapel... very strange choice of words... implies perhaps a lack of knowledge of priests in what they stand for before God. Fr. Perez & Fr. Starbuck didn't "take over the chapel." Their vows & commitment to God were to save your soul (if you are a member of OLHC) my soul and all the souls at OLHC. They do that by confessions, baptisms, anointing of the sick, Holy Mass with the Holy Communion. "The Board" should honor and revere the priest and respect his opinion (Fr. Perez when he was pastor all this time and with his passing (God bless him) should have given that place rightly to Fr. Starbuck. He has earned his logical place as pastor because he gave of himself for 15 years at OLHC. THERE IS A RUMOR THAT FR. PEREZ HANDED SOME "HAND WRITTEN" NOTE TO THE BOARD STATING THAT THE BOARD WOULD BE IN CHARGE. I DON'T BUY OR BELIEVE THAT. SHOW THE NOTE TO THE FAITHFUL!
In no way should it happen that this usurper who is here for a little under a year and expects to "take over", by undermining Fr. Starbuck and manipulating and coning his way to being pastor!
This is an insult to God's will because God gave his blessings to Fr. Starbuck just by the fact that he was "Our priest" who heard our confessions, baptized infants, change the bread into the Body of Christ for us for 15 years!
Ha! "The Board" What a Joke! "The Board" totally disrespected, betrayed, trashed, and dishonored Father's presence here who served for 15 years. Why? Just because Fr. wanted "Fr." Wiest to be properly VETTED! Like Judas who betrayed Christ, they turned on Father Starbuck literally overnight (threatening Fr. if he came on the chapel property again he would be arrested for trespassing literally DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS. WHAT KIND OF CRUEL, EVIL BEINGS ARE THESE?) Why? Because Father gave a sermon telling the truth about "Fr. Wiest" not being vetted. When asked to show his drivers license because that's the law in California (when working with children an employee has an obligation to show it) HE REFUSED!
You wrote: "If those people own the property, then they would choose the priest that works for them, no? The answer is "NO!" That's how protestants operate NOT CATHOLICS! THE PRIEST HAS THE IMPRIMATUR TO LEAD FROM GOD... NOT THE LAYMAN!J
Sorry, I didn't mean to pounce on you... I just got caught up in the emotions and passions of the injustice to Ft. Starbuck. I might of gone off topic some. This is kinda long. O well...have a nice day and God bless you.
-
Wrong! You wrote: When would an independent priest come and take over a chapel... very strange choice of words... implies perhaps a lack of knowledge of priests in what they stand for before God. Fr. Perez & Fr. Starbuck didn't "take over the chapel." Their vows & commitment to God were to save your soul (if you are a member of OLHC) my soul and all the souls at OLHC. They do that by confessions, baptisms, anointing of the sick, Holy Mass with the Holy Communion. "The Board" should honor and revere the priest and respect his opinion (Fr. Perez when he was pastor all this time and with his passing (God bless him) should have given that place rightly to Fr. Starbuck. He has earned his logical place as pastor because he gave of himself for 15 years at OLHC. THERE IS A RUMOR THAT FR. PEREZ HANDED SOME "HAND WRITTEN" NOTE TO THE BOARD STATING THAT THE BOARD WOULD BE IN CHARGE. I DON'T BUY OR BELIEVE THAT. SHOW THE NOTE TO THE FAITHFUL!
In no way should it happen that this usurper who is here for a little under a year and expects to "take over", by undermining Fr. Starbuck and manipulating and coning his way to being pastor!
This is an insult to God's will because God gave his blessings to Fr. Starbuck just by the fact that he was "Our priest" who heard our confessions, baptized infants, change the bread into the Body of Christ for us for 15 years!
Ha! "The Board" What a Joke! "The Board" totally disrespected, betrayed, trashed, and dishonored Father's presence here who served for 15 years. Why? Just because Fr. wanted "Fr." Wiest to be properly VETTED! Like Judas who betrayed Christ, they turned on Father Starbuck literally overnight (threatening Fr. if he came on the chapel property again he would be arrested for trespassing literally DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS. WHAT KIND OF CRUEL, EVIL BEINGS ARE THESE?) Why? Because Father gave a sermon telling the truth about "Fr. Wiest" not being vetted. When asked to show his drivers license because that's the law in California (when working with children an employee has an obligation to show it) HE REFUSED!
You wrote: "If those people own the property, then they would choose the priest that works for them, no? The answer is "NO!" That's how protestants operate NOT CATHOLICS! THE PRIEST HAS THE IMPRIMATUR TO LEAD FROM GOD... NOT THE LAYMAN!J
Sorry, I didn't mean to pounce on you... I just got caught up in the emotions and passions of the injustice to Ft. Starbuck. I might of gone off topic some. This is kinda long. O well...have a nice day and God bless you.
I agree with you.
However, Fr. Perez DID accept Wiest, just as he accepted Colletti and Croisette. That is a fact whether we like it or not.
It is unfortunate they threatened Fr. Starbuck if he set foot on the property. Seems to me I recall Fr. Starbuck doing the same thing to a very poor, old, and in ill health, carmelite nun. Why he and Fr. Perez attacked her so vehemently while allowing Wiest, Colletti, and Croisette, still remains a mystery to me.
Without Fr. Perez leaving his wishes regarding the passing of the torch clearly known, Fr. Perez left the faithful in a real pickle.
Now it becomes the problem of the faithful to vet Wiest in whatever way possible, if only to protect the children. It involves Catholic Action, and a lot of it.
-
supportfrstarbuck & epiphany, you both got a lot of things incorrect. I'm thinking you've only been there a few years & don't really know the history of OLHC. I'm not excusing the Board, but, except for Joel, they've been there since day one. As for that phony nun - that's a whole 'nother story. Isn't she saying herself that she's not a Carmelite now, just a hermit?
-
supportfrstarbuck & epiphany, you both got a lot of things incorrect. I'm thinking you've only been there a few years & don't really know the history of OLHC. I'm not excusing the Board, but, except for Joel, they've been there since day one. As for that phony nun - that's a whole 'nother story. Isn't she saying herself that she's not a Carmelite now, just a hermit?
My family was there 38 years... before OLHC even had a school. I was there the first 13 years, before I moved, but kept in close touch with Fr. Schell. We loved him so.
Fr. Sretenovic was at the nun's final vows. She is not phony. Carmelites were ALL hermits when they started.
-
I am really quite surprised the board doesn't ask Fr. Sretenovic back.
-
I am really quite surprised the board doesn't ask Fr. Sretenovic back.
Many of us were quite surprised that the school board did not continue with Father Starbuck who we fully expected to take over following the unexpected passing of Father Perez. We were also shocked at the school board's animosity toward our good faithful priest.
We knew that Father Starbuck would be able to do what neither the school board nor Father Perez had ever done, that is to follow the law (and common sense) and find out IF Wiest has ever been ordained, or not. It is a sad fact that Father Starbuck is the only one who protected the children of the chapel by telling us the truth about Colletti.
Father Starbuck weathered the school board's inexplicable attacks and has now shaken the dust off his feet. His chapel now has three Masses on Sunday (along with confessions), as well as Masses on Fridays and Saturdays. He has also been performing Baptisms and Marriages. (He needs a baptismal font if anyone knows a source for a good deal.)
God bless the person who live-streams the OLHC Sunday Mass; he will be switching over to live-streaming Father Starbuck's Mass at the end of January.
Please join us as we continue to pray the 54-day Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for the rot to be removed from OLHC and for the protection and guidance of Father Starbuck.
May God continue to bless Father Starbuck.
-
epiphany - they had a school a long time before they bought the present property. This property is fairly new for them. They had a school in various buildings, long before they had this church building. I'm thinking it was in the 70's - or before - when they had a school in a park building in GG. Where your parents there then? Were they there when Fr. Perez first came on board?
Do you know Debbie's history? It goes way back. Fr. S. may have heard her "final vows", but he's not a Carmelite so it really means nothing. After she took final vows, now she's not a Carmelite but just a hermit!!! I'm telling you, the place is now a circus. If you're happy with Fr. Starbuck & his chapel, then I would brush the dust from your feet & move on.
-
Epiphany
Thank you for your years at OLHC and thank you for your love for Fr. Schell. I've been a supporting member of OLHC for 15 years!
-
epiphany - they had a school a long time before they bought the present property. This property is fairly new for them. They had a school in various buildings, long before they had this church building. I'm thinking it was in the 70's - or before - when they had a school in a park building in GG. Where your parents there then? Were they there when Fr. Perez first came on board?
Do you know Debbie's history? It goes way back. Fr. S. may have heard her "final vows", but he's not a Carmelite so it really means nothing. After she took final vows, now she's not a Carmelite but just a hermit!!! I'm telling you, the place is now a circus. If you're happy with Fr. Starbuck & his chapel, then I would brush the dust from your feet & move on.
My family has been with OLHC 38 years, long before Fr. Perez or the school.
Fr. Schell, God rest his soul, was at my parent's house talking to them about the possibility of forming a school long before there was a formal school.
I know sister's history and you are WAY off base, to the point of causing detraction. Sister A is a nun, full stop. She needs prayers.
FYI, ALL carmelites were hermits when the order began, and it is still an option now.
Fr. Sretenovic wrote his lineage here on CI. Wiest should do the same, providing copies of docuмents, since he has lied in the past, and then show his papers to the entire congregation.
-
It wouldn't be the school board's responsibility to vet a priest. That would have been Fr. Perez's responsibility.
This is partly true.
Fr. Perez should have vetted Wiest to see if he was a priest.
The school board should have done a background check on him to see if he is who he says he is, and to protect the children of the school.
-
Fr. Perez should have vetted Wiest to see if he was a priest.
The school board should have done a background check on him to see if he is who he says he is, and to protect the children of the school.
Definitely.
The status of a priest is not his own personal business -- a priest is a public man. His ordination and credentials are a matter of public record and the public good -- much more so than an engineer's credentials as an engineer (degree, grades, certifications, etc.)
Life and death, heaven and hell rest upon a given priest being a valid priest. Hence the reason why ANY layman should be able to look into the ordination of any priest. And the priest should be happy to give his credentials -- unless he has something to hide of course. Beware any priest who gets angry when you ask about his ordination.
Sincerely,
A disinterested third-party who will always be far from California (Deo gratias!)
-
I run as fast as I can away from such a man posing as a priest.
-
Epiphany
Thank you for your years at OLHC and thank you for your love for Fr. Schell. I've been a supporting member of OLHC for 15 years!
Fr. Schell was the best priest I have ever had the pleasure of knowing and receiving sacraments from. His advice was always spot on. I pray he is with the angels now.
I haven't personally attended OLHC/St Patrick's Mission for years but I keep up with all of you because of my love for Fr. Schell.
He once told me his goal before he died was to establish a school. I imagine he is watching in disgust at the the school and chapel he spent his life building being torn apart by an infiltrator posing as a priest.
-
epiphany, perhaps we're referring to 2 different women. There is a real nun there who came after Debbie. I'm referring to the hermit. I'm surprised she hasn't left yet. Her MO is to stay, then leave for some convent, then come back to leave again for another convent & return in her made-up 'habit'. This went on for years.
Matthew, OLHC is a mere pin prick in the map of CA. CA is a beautiful state, large enough to be a nation, with everything going for it - miles of seashore, mountains, deserts, cities, wide open spaces, farms, etc. etc. There are many beautiful SSPX churches & also Mel Gibson's beautiful church with a priest to say the TLM. To equate CA with OLHC is a stretch as many other states have their weirdos too.
-
epiphany, what nun were you referring to? I think that the nun that came a few years ago was young.
-
epiphany, perhaps we're referring to 2 different women. There is a real nun there who came after Debbie. I'm referring to the hermit. I'm surprised she hasn't left yet. Her MO is to stay, then leave for some convent, then come back to leave again for another convent & return in her made-up 'habit'. This went on for years.
Matthew, OLHC is a mere pin prick in the map of CA. CA is a beautiful state, large enough to be a nation, with everything going for it - miles of seashore, mountains, deserts, cities, wide open spaces, farms, etc. etc. There are many beautiful SSPX churches & also Mel Gibson's beautiful church with a priest to say the TLM. To equate CA with OLHC is a stretch as many other states have their weirdos too.
Sister A is a carmelite hermit. She is older and in very ill health. She is VERY poor, many days going without food and shelter. She has no vehicle.
If you have extra charity to go around, I encourage you to seek her out and help her. She is a wonderful nun, if you take the time to get to know her.
She was treated very poorly by Fr. Perez. Fr. Sretenovic treated her well. Fr. Starbuck treated her well for a while until he told her to never come back or the police would be called.
You are flat out wrong about her convent travels. I encourage you to stop this detraction against her.
OLHC is not a pinprick in the Traditional Catholic map of CA.... Fr. Schell is THE reason there are so many mass options within close proximity in S. Cal, for it seems to be the policy of all chapels to set up operations near an existing chapel.
Every traditional Catholic in S. Cal should thank and pray for Fr. Schell every day. Without him, you likely wouldn't have mass.
God bless Fr. Schell.
-
St. Dominic's Chapel Sunday Bulletin - January 23, 2022
Father Cedrick Starbuck
The interest, devotion and love shown to Father Starbuck at St. Dominic's Chapel has been manifested by the full capacity attendance at all Sunday's Masses. It is recommended to come early as seating is quickly filled. As always, the rosary is said before each Mass. As always, Father Starbuck will be hearing confessions before all Masses, continuing his 15-year tradition/history (previously at OLHC and now at St. Dominic's Chapel) of his continuing commitment and self-giving by hearing confessions before all Masses.
The Mass schedule for January 21st - January 23rd is as follows:
Friday: There is NO Mass this Friday due to parking restrictions
Saturday: 8:30 a.m.
Sunday: 7:30 a.m., 9:30 a.m. (NO 12:00 p.m. Mass today)
Please pray for Father Starbuck that God will strengthen him. We are asked to humbly examine our conscious and show our appreciation and gratitude to Father by supporting him in his time of financial need for the sacrifices he is making to God... for us. Please be generous. Thank you.
-
St. Dominic's Chapel Sunday Bulletin - January 23, 2022
(PAGE 2)
TO THOSE WHO WISH TO RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT FATHER STARBUCK HAD BEEN ABANDONED, BETRAYED AND LEFT "HIGH & DRY" WITHOUT FUNDS NEARLY OVERNIGHT - TWO DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS - BY THOSE IN CHARGE ("THE BOARD" OF OUR LADY HELP OF CHRISTIANS) BY THEM ORDERING HIM (AFTER 15 YEARS OF FAITHFULLY SERVING OLHC BY HIM PERFORMING HIS PRIESTLY DUTIES, I.E., SAYING MASS, HEARING CONFESSIONS, BAPTISMS, ANOINTING OF THE SICK, FUNERALS, ETC. TO NOT COME ON THE PROPERTY OF OLHC AGAIN OR "WE WILL HAVE YOU ARRESTED FOR TRESPASSING" BECAUSE OF THE CONTENTS OF A SERMON HE GAVE REGARDING THE VETTING OF "FR." MICHAEL WIEST AT OLHC! THE COMPLETE SERMON CAN BE READ ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE THREAD " OLHC LAYPERSONS ATTEMPTING TO TAKE OVER CHAPEL CENSOR FR. STARBUCK'S SERMON" OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/olhc-laypersons-attempting-to-take-over-chapel-censor-father-starbuck'es-sermon/msg794398/#msg794398)
GENEROUS FUNDS IS URGENTLY NEEDED FOR FATHER IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN HIMSELF GOING FORWARD IN HIS QUEST AND COMMITMENT TO FAITHFULLY SAY THE PRE1962 LATIN MASS AT HIS NEW ST. DOMINIC'S CHAPEL!
FATHER HAS MANY NEEDS FOR FUNDS WHICH INCLUDE FOOD AND VERY URGENTLY FATHER CANNOT AFFORD AND DOES NOT HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE! THIS PUTS FATHER IN A VERY DIRE EMERGENCY SITUATION IF HE WERE TO (GOD FORBID) GET SICK!
AS THE AUTHOR OF THIS THREAD (SUPPORTFRSTARBUCK) FATHER HAS NO IDEA THAT I'M MAKING THIS PLEA FOR HIM. IN FACT, FATHER DOESN'T LIKE TALKING ABOUT HIMSELF, SO I'M HOPING FATHER DOES NOT GET DISAPPOINTED IN ME FOR THIS PLEA!
FATHER WROTE: "Additionally, I do know that the board is considering (interviewing) priests who celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. I want to say that it has been our position that this Missal is theologically inadequate (if not modernistic). Fr. Perez vehemently rejected the 1962 Roman Missal. Moreover, it is likely to be problematic to our public celebration of Mass in this church."
SO FATHER IS A FAITHFUL RARE PRIEST TO THE PRE1962 MISSAL. SO OUR LORD AND SAVIOR LOVES FATHER DEARLY FOR THIS "PASSION" HE SUFFERED AT THE HANDS OF OLHC CHAPEL THESE LAST FEW MONTHS. HE GAVE OF HIS BLOOD, SWEAT & TEARS.
I ASK THAT YOU LOOK INTO YOUR HEARTS AND FIND A WAY TO SUPPORT FATHER STARBUCK FINANCIALLY IN WHATEVER WAY GOD PROMPTS YOU BY THE INDWELLING OF THE HOLY GHOST WITHIN YOU. GOD WILL REWARD YOU FOR HELPING THIS VERY HOLY HUMBLE PRIEST OF CHRIST! HERE IS FATHER'S POST OFFICE BOX. THANK YOU.
FATHER CEDRICK STARBUCK
P.O.B. 427
TUSTIN, CA 92781
-
AGIN! i AM TERRIBLY SORRY ABOUT THE UNINTENDED VERY LARGE FONT OF THE PREVIOUS POST. I CANT BELIEVE IT. I THINK I WAS PLAYING WITH THE FONT SIZE... BUT I DIDN'T INTENDED IT TO BE IN NO WAY THIS LARGE. SORRY.
-
I've reconfigured the font size. I hope this works so it can be read in the proper font size...
St. Dominic's Chapel Sunday Bulletin - January 23, 2022
(PAGE 2)
TO THOSE WHO WISH TO RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT FATHER STARBUCK HAD BEEN ABANDONED, BETRAYED AND LEFT "HIGH & DRY" WITHOUT FUNDS NEARLY OVERNIGHT - TWO DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS - BY THOSE IN CHARGE ("THE BOARD" OF OUR LADY HELP OF CHRISTIANS) BY THEM ORDERING HIM (AFTER 15 YEARS OF FAITHFULLY SERVING OLHC BY HIM PERFORMING HIS PRIESTLY DUTIES, I.E., SAYING MASS, HEARING CONFESSIONS, BAPTISMS, ANOINTING OF THE SICK, FUNERALS, ETC. TO NOT COME ON THE PROPERTY OF OLHC AGAIN OR "WE WILL HAVE YOU ARRESTED FOR TRESPASSING" BECAUSE OF THE CONTENTS OF A SERMON HE GAVE REGARDING THE VETTING OF "FR." MICHAEL WIEST AT OLHC!
THE COMPLETE SERMON CAN BE READ ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE THREAD " OLHC LAYPERSONS ATTEMPTING TO TAKE OVER CHAPEL CENSOR FR. STARBUCK'S SERMON" OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/olhc-laypersons-attempting-to-take-over-chapel-censor-father-starbuck'es-sermon/msg794398/#msg794398)
GENEROUS FUNDS IS URGENTLY NEEDED FOR FATHER IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN HIMSELF GOING FORWARD IN HIS QUEST AND COMMITMENT TO FAITHFULLY SAY THE PRE1962 LATIN MASS AT HIS NEW ST. DOMINIC'S CHAPEL!
FATHER HAS MANY NEEDS FOR FUNDS WHICH INCLUDE FOOD AND VERY URGENTLY FATHER CANNOT AFFORD AND DOES NOT HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE! THIS PUTS FATHER IN A VERY DIRE EMERGENCY SITUATION IF HE WERE TO (GOD FORBID) GET SICK!
AS THE AUTHOR OF THIS THREAD (SUPPORTFRSTARBUCK) FATHER HAS NO IDEA THAT I'M MAKING THIS PLEA FOR HIM. IN FACT, FATHER DOESN'T LIKE TALKING ABOUT HIMSELF, SO I'M HOPING FATHER DOES NOT GET DISAPPOINTED IN ME FOR THIS PLEA!
FATHER WROTE: "Additionally, I do know that the board is considering (interviewing) priests who celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. I want to say that it has been our position that this Missal is theologically inadequate (if not modernistic). Fr. Perez vehemently rejected the 1962 Roman Missal. Moreover, it is likely to be problematic to our public celebration of Mass in this church."
SO FATHER IS A FAITHFUL RARE PRIEST TO THE PRE1962 MISSAL. SO OUR LORD AND SAVIOR LOVES FATHER DEARLY FOR THIS "PASSION" HE SUFFERED AT THE HANDS OF OLHC CHAPEL THESE LAST FEW MONTHS. HE GAVE OF HIS BLOOD, SWEAT & TEARS.
I ASK THAT YOU LOOK INTO YOUR HEARTS AND FIND A WAY TO SUPPORT FATHER STARBUCK FINANCIALLY IN WHATEVER WAY GOD PROMPTS YOU BY THE INDWELLING OF THE HOLY GHOST WITHIN YOU. GOD WILL REWARD YOU FOR HELPING THIS VERY HOLY HUMBLE PRIEST OF CHRIST! HERE IS FATHER'S POST OFFICE BOX. THANK YOU.
FATHER CEDRICK STARBUCK
P.O.B. 427
TUSTIN, CA 92781
-
I've reconfigured the font size. I hope this works so it can be read in the proper font size...
St. Dominic's Chapel Sunday Bulletin - January 23, 2022
(PAGE 2)
TO THOSE WHO WISH TO RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT FATHER STARBUCK HAD BEEN ABANDONED, BETRAYED AND LEFT "HIGH & DRY" WITHOUT FUNDS NEARLY OVERNIGHT - TWO DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS - BY THOSE IN CHARGE ("THE BOARD" OF OUR LADY HELP OF CHRISTIANS) BY THEM ORDERING HIM (AFTER 15 YEARS OF FAITHFULLY SERVING OLHC BY HIM PERFORMING HIS PRIESTLY DUTIES, I.E., SAYING MASS, HEARING CONFESSIONS, BAPTISMS, ANOINTING OF THE SICK, FUNERALS, ETC. TO NOT COME ON THE PROPERTY OF OLHC AGAIN OR "WE WILL HAVE YOU ARRESTED FOR TRESPASSING" BECAUSE OF THE CONTENTS OF A SERMON HE GAVE REGARDING THE VETTING OF "FR." MICHAEL WIEST AT OLHC!
THE COMPLETE SERMON CAN BE READ ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE THREAD " OLHC LAYPERSONS ATTEMPTING TO TAKE OVER CHAPEL CENSOR FR. STARBUCK'S SERMON" OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/olhc-laypersons-attempting-to-take-over-chapel-censor-father-starbuck'es-sermon/msg794398/#msg794398)
GENEROUS FUNDS IS URGENTLY NEEDED FOR FATHER IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN HIMSELF GOING FORWARD IN HIS QUEST AND COMMITMENT TO FAITHFULLY SAY THE PRE1962 LATIN MASS AT HIS NEW ST. DOMINIC'S CHAPEL!
FATHER HAS MANY NEEDS FOR FUNDS WHICH INCLUDE FOOD AND VERY URGENTLY FATHER CANNOT AFFORD AND DOES NOT HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE! THIS PUTS FATHER IN A VERY DIRE EMERGENCY SITUATION IF HE WERE TO (GOD FORBID) GET SICK!
AS THE AUTHOR OF THIS THREAD (SUPPORTFRSTARBUCK) FATHER HAS NO IDEA THAT I'M MAKING THIS PLEA FOR HIM. IN FACT, FATHER DOESN'T LIKE TALKING ABOUT HIMSELF, SO I'M HOPING FATHER DOES NOT GET DISAPPOINTED IN ME FOR THIS PLEA!
FATHER WROTE: "Additionally, I do know that the board is considering (interviewing) priests who celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. I want to say that it has been our position that this Missal is theologically inadequate (if not modernistic). Fr. Perez vehemently rejected the 1962 Roman Missal. Moreover, it is likely to be problematic to our public celebration of Mass in this church."
SO FATHER IS A FAITHFUL RARE PRIEST TO THE PRE1962 MISSAL. SO OUR LORD AND SAVIOR LOVES FATHER DEARLY FOR THIS "PASSION" HE SUFFERED AT THE HANDS OF OLHC CHAPEL THESE LAST FEW MONTHS. HE GAVE OF HIS BLOOD, SWEAT & TEARS.
I ASK THAT YOU LOOK INTO YOUR HEARTS AND FIND A WAY TO SUPPORT FATHER STARBUCK FINANCIALLY IN WHATEVER WAY GOD PROMPTS YOU BY THE INDWELLING OF THE HOLY GHOST WITHIN YOU. GOD WILL REWARD YOU FOR HELPING THIS VERY HOLY HUMBLE PRIEST OF CHRIST! HERE IS FATHER'S POST OFFICE BOX. THANK YOU.
FATHER CEDRICK STARBUCK
P.O.B. 427
TUSTIN, CA 92781
Dear Support Father Starbuck,
I realize that your heart is in the right place, however I'm sure you will agree that it's somewhat misleading to put the title St. Dominic's Chapel Sunday Bulletin - January 23, 2022
on your own comments. Please clarify this and thank you for your efforts to support Father Starbuck.
God bless you,
Cera
-
Cera: Yes, Thank you. God bless you...
-
I've reconfigured the font size. I hope this works so it can be read in the proper font size...
St. Dominic's Chapel Sunday Bulletin - January 23, 2022
(PAGE 2)
TO THOSE WHO WISH TO RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT FATHER STARBUCK HAD BEEN ABANDONED, BETRAYED AND LEFT "HIGH & DRY" WITHOUT FUNDS NEARLY OVERNIGHT - TWO DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS - BY THOSE IN CHARGE ("THE BOARD" OF OUR LADY HELP OF CHRISTIANS) BY THEM ORDERING HIM (AFTER 15 YEARS OF FAITHFULLY SERVING OLHC BY HIM PERFORMING HIS PRIESTLY DUTIES, I.E., SAYING MASS, HEARING CONFESSIONS, BAPTISMS, ANOINTING OF THE SICK, FUNERALS, ETC. TO NOT COME ON THE PROPERTY OF OLHC AGAIN OR "WE WILL HAVE YOU ARRESTED FOR TRESPASSING" BECAUSE OF THE CONTENTS OF A SERMON HE GAVE REGARDING THE VETTING OF "FR." MICHAEL WIEST AT OLHC!
THE COMPLETE SERMON CAN BE READ ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE THREAD " OLHC LAYPERSONS ATTEMPTING TO TAKE OVER CHAPEL CENSOR FR. STARBUCK'S SERMON" OLHC laypersons attempting to take over chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/olhc-laypersons-attempting-to-take-over-chapel-censor-father-starbuck'es-sermon/msg794398/#msg794398)
GENEROUS FUNDS IS URGENTLY NEEDED FOR FATHER IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN HIMSELF GOING FORWARD IN HIS QUEST AND COMMITMENT TO FAITHFULLY SAY THE PRE1962 LATIN MASS AT HIS NEW ST. DOMINIC'S CHAPEL!
FATHER HAS MANY NEEDS FOR FUNDS WHICH INCLUDE FOOD AND VERY URGENTLY FATHER CANNOT AFFORD AND DOES NOT HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE! THIS PUTS FATHER IN A VERY DIRE EMERGENCY SITUATION IF HE WERE TO (GOD FORBID) GET SICK!
AS THE AUTHOR OF THIS THREAD (SUPPORTFRSTARBUCK) FATHER HAS NO IDEA THAT I'M MAKING THIS PLEA FOR HIM. IN FACT, FATHER DOESN'T LIKE TALKING ABOUT HIMSELF, SO I'M HOPING FATHER DOES NOT GET DISAPPOINTED IN ME FOR THIS PLEA!
FATHER WROTE: "Additionally, I do know that the board is considering (interviewing) priests who celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. I want to say that it has been our position that this Missal is theologically inadequate (if not modernistic). Fr. Perez vehemently rejected the 1962 Roman Missal. Moreover, it is likely to be problematic to our public celebration of Mass in this church."
SO FATHER IS A FAITHFUL RARE PRIEST TO THE PRE1962 MISSAL. SO OUR LORD AND SAVIOR LOVES FATHER DEARLY FOR THIS "PASSION" HE SUFFERED AT THE HANDS OF OLHC CHAPEL THESE LAST FEW MONTHS. HE GAVE OF HIS BLOOD, SWEAT & TEARS.
I ASK THAT YOU LOOK INTO YOUR HEARTS AND FIND A WAY TO SUPPORT FATHER STARBUCK FINANCIALLY IN WHATEVER WAY GOD PROMPTS YOU BY THE INDWELLING OF THE HOLY GHOST WITHIN YOU. GOD WILL REWARD YOU FOR HELPING THIS VERY HOLY HUMBLE PRIEST OF CHRIST! HERE IS FATHER'S POST OFFICE BOX. THANK YOU.
FATHER CEDRICK STARBUCK
P.O.B. 427
TUSTIN, CA 92781
Fr. Starbuck lives in CA, the state with very liberal government aid. Can't he get food stamps, money, bus service or dial-a-ride, medical care and even housing aid?
Sister A, as a Carmelite, is not allowed to receive such. She is in dire need, going many days without food or shelter.
-
Fr. Starbuck lives in CA, the state with very liberal government aid. Can't he get food stamps, money, bus service or dial-a-ride, medical care and even housing aid?
Sister A, as a Carmelite, is not allowed to receive such. She is in dire need, going many days without food or shelter.
Father Starbuck has moral objections to being on the dole.
-
Sister A, as a Carmelite, is not allowed to receive such. She is in dire need, going many days without food or shelter.
Wait a minute? The people in this chapel are allowing an elderly woman to go without food or shelter?
-
Father Starbuck has moral objections to being on the dole.
Good for him. Sister is not allowed to be on the dole, per her order.
-
Wait a minute? The people in this chapel are allowing an elderly woman to go without food or shelter?
Not just an elderly woman, but an elderly and ill professed carmelite nun. She has been going without proper food and shelter for a few years now. sickening.
and even if they don't consider her a nun, which is a fallacy, she is still a human being.
-
Any updates of the status of "Fr." Michael Wiest? Is he still hearing confessions and saying Mass without having been vetted by the "School Board?" Do we know yet where he was ordained, when and what bishop ordained him Do we know where he has been serving as a priest for the past 20 years or so? Why does Padre Pio Academy "School Board" allow this to go on without vetting "Fr." Michael Wiest? Why does he continue to vehemently refuse to show his drivers license when ask to do so because its the law if he is working with children (alter boys). Why is there NO MICHAEL WIEST ANYWHERE ON THE INTERNET? Any updates? Is he still there? Imagine how the faithful would feel if they realized that they have been made fools of by going to someone for confession, Mass WHO IS NOT A PRIEST! The Class Action Law Suit will be massive against OLHC, Padre Pio Academy and "The Board!" Updates anyone??
-
Any updates of the status of "Fr." Michael Wiest? Is he still hearing confessions and saying Mass without having been vetted by the "School Board?" Do we know yet where he was ordained, when and what bishop ordained him Do we know where he has been serving as a priest for the past 20 years or so? Why does Padre Pio Academy "School Board" allow this to go on without vetting "Fr." Michael Wiest? Why does he continue to vehemently refuse to show his drivers license when ask to do so because its the law if he is working with children (alter boys). Why is there NO MICHAEL WIEST ANYWHERE ON THE INTERNET? Any updates? Is he still there? Imagine how the faithful would feel if they realized that they have been made fools of by going to someone for confession, Mass WHO IS NOT A PRIEST! The Class Action Law Suit will be massive against OLHC, Padre Pio Academy and "The Board!" Updates anyone??
from OLHC website
"January 6, 2022
A. M. D. G.
I write this letter for a double purpose. Both are important. One is of good wishes for the present.
God first willingly submitted Himself to unrestrained human evil for a purpose of His own, and then quickly undid all the effects of evil by rising from the dead. In so doing, he achieved the results he sought in His passion and death and thus nullified and triumphed over all the evil men had done Him. Thus He vindicated and established His work and His power, both as regards His own affairs and as regards what He has promised to us. With God, responsible effort and good will never end in defeat, though for a time there may be darkness. The implications of all these things have limitless applications to our successes and failures, our trials and our blessings in this life, and to the ultimate outcome of all the things which are beyond our control but within the bounds of Divine Knowledge and Power. This is the sure, certain basis for unwavering and unshakeable Christian confidence, peace, hope. Some in-depth participation in this light and goodness and joy is what I wish you and yours as a special blessing.
And secondly, I have been conscious of your great kindness to me at Christmas. I cannot be absolved of the obligation of gratitude until I express to you my appreciation of your kindness and thoughtfulness.
Sincerely in Christ,
Father Schell (1982)
[Fr. Schell was SO great! Always spot on. Pray for him.]
"Father Fred Schell was responsible for bringing Holy Mass to us from the mid-1970’s until his death some 25 years later. Father says it well that, “responsible effort and good will never end in defeat, though for a time there may be darkness”. At the time of Monsignor Perez’ death, the Padre Pio Academy Board of Directors was presented by Monsignor’s sister, a sealed envelope containing a letter, handwritten by Monsignor and, dated March 4, 2021, (while he was in reasonably good health and certainly of sound mind) and witnessed by two of his friends, neither of whom were/are board members. In this letter, he transfers complete authority of Our Lady Help of Christians to the PPA Board of Directors, who he (Monsignor Perez), gives the full responsibility with specific instructions, of finding a new pastor. Upon meeting with that same Board and being informed of the instructions given them by Monsignor, Father Starbuck’s deciding reply, as he reiterated in his public sermon and as has been published on the internet, was that he would not work under the authority of another priest as pastor; nor would he take any good faith advice from the Board. As you can deduce from the sermon of December 19, Father Starbuck refused to accept Monsignor’s stipulation, effectively declining to work with other priests, and in fact publicly denouncing one by name. This had clearly become an unworkable situation since Father had obviously decided to go his own way. We wish Father Starbuck well and thank him for the years he has spent with us.
Some there are who have accused the Board’s members of money- and power-grabbing. Be it known that these members and other parishioners who have selflessly helped them, have spent countless hours and days with no remuneration (nor do they want or expect any,) compensating as best they can for the void left by the death of Monsignor Perez. As for power-grabbing, where is the power? In the labor of love? In executing the directives of the Monsignor Perez? In suffering baseless narcissistic allegations and fabrications?
Please keep Our Lady Help of Christians in your prayers as the Board continues to perform its legal and ethical obligations in the best interest of the Chapel, (three weeks completed), and as we move forward in our search for qualified priestly candidates. God willing, we will have the Traditional Latin Mass celebrated every Sunday, and soon daily, upon our altar. Sadly, this is all part of the penance we must suffer through due to the tragic state of the Church and of the world today. “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph.”
We can only pray that "qualified priestly candidates" does not include Wiest, Pfeiffer or any of his ilk including Croisette, Cooke, Poisson, Tetherow, Cordaro, Macek, Moran, Roberts, or worse, Ensey (who used to be a congregation member), etc.
-
from OLHC website
At the time of Monsignor Perez’ death, the Padre Pio Academy Board of Directors was presented by Monsignor’s sister, a sealed envelope containing a letter, handwritten by Monsignor and, dated March 4, 2021, (while he was in reasonably good health and certainly of sound mind) and witnessed by two of his friends, neither of whom were/are board members. In this letter, he transfers complete authority of Our Lady Help of Christians to the PPA Board of Directors, who he (Monsignor Perez), gives the full responsibility with specific instructions, of finding a new pastor.
This is not the first story told by the flip-flopping school board.
1. First they circulated the story that Father Perez wrote such a letter in 2014.
2. When members of the chapel didn't buy that, they then spread the story of Father Perez writing the purported letter prior to his hip surgery in March 2021, when he was in enormous pain and didn’t know if he’d make it through surgery.
3. The latest version now includes two corrections or additions
3a. They now claim that he was not in enormous pain but rather in “reasonably good health.”
3b The addition of Father Perez’s grieving sister having a copy of the purported letter.
Those of us who were blessed to have known Father Perez, know that he was a straightforward person who said what he thought. At times he was even known to be blunt. If Father Perez truly had written any letter in case of his unexpected death, he would have been straightforward. If Father Perez did not want Father Starbuck to take his place as head of the chapel, he would have made that clear to Father Starbuck and to others. He did not do so.
Father Perez’s death was totally unexpected, and at the time of the writing of this purported letter he would not know if his sister would pre-decease him or not. It makes no sense whatsoever that he would supposedly give only one copy to one person.
If any such letter actually existed, Father Perez would have given a copy to Father Starbuck and several key members of the parish, but not to the four school board members because that would appear to be an obvious conflict of interest. (Look we found this letter which gives us total control!)
The following have yet to be verified:
Whether this purported "letter" actually exists or not,
whether this purported "letter" was actually written by Father Perez or not,
whether this purported "letter" was ever in the hands of Father Perez's sister or not.
Given the earlier versions of the school board’s stories, strong reasons exist to doubt their veracity.
Another unanswered question is why has the school board has repeatedly covered up for Wiest?
He has repeatedly and adamantly refused to produce his drivers’ license.
He has repeatedly and adamantly refused to produce papers of ordination.
He was presenting himself as a layman six months prior to arriving at OLHC. (Photo evidence)
He had a pagan altar in his home. (Photo evidence).
Father Starbuck had originally been asked by Father Perez to follow up with the school board as to why they refused to properly vet Wiest. After the untimely death of Father Perez, Father Starbuck continued to comply with Father Perez’s directive. For doing so, the school board struck back by circulating lies about Father Starbuck. Knowing that chapel members had been previously wounded by admitted pedophile and laicised Father Colletti, our good Father Starbuck persisted. As a last resort, he eventually addressed the problem from the pulpit, asking the school board to do their due diligence. That was at the 7:30 Mass. He then heard confessions prior to the next Mass.
While confessions were in progress, one school board member went to the next person in line and told her that she was the last confession. Then he went to the outside confessional door. (Did he wait until she was findished?) Then he yanked the confessional door open and screamed at Father Starbuck not to mention the problem again from the pulpit. The same school board member then unplugged the mike so no one could hear the sermon.
Why is the school board attacking Father Starbuck and why are they refusing to vet Wiest? They have continued to support Wiest financially, while at the same time they cut off financial support for Sister te Deo, kicking her out of her home right before Christmas. Likewise, after leading Father Starbuck to believe that he would continue to serve the chapel for a period of time, they abruptly told him on Dec. 23 that he would not be saying Masses on Christmas, he was on “vacation” and he would be “arrested for trespassing” if he set foot on the property.
For good measure, the school board attempted to set up Father Starbuck by having a person plead with him that they needed to get something out of Father Starbuck’s locked private office on the property and would he please go with them to OLHC. He is a kind priest always willing to help, but Our Lady protected him. (It's obvious, given their track record that had he agreed to the person's request, he would undoubtedly have been arrested for trespassing and they would have taken photos in order to further humiliate him.)
The school board also. cut off financial support for Father Starbuck. They instructed chapel members to send all checks, including Mass offerings to Mary Lewis, who designated herself to decide how much of the Mass offerings to keep and how much to pass on to Father Starbuck.
The school board have proven themselves to be untrustworthy.
Please join us in saying the 54-day Rosary Novena to Our Lady of the Rosary for the rot to be rooted out of the chapel and for the protection and guidance of Father Starbuck. Janurary 27th will be day 27, and then we will begin our prayers of thanksgiving.
-
We can only pray that "qualified priestly candidates" does not include Wiest, Pfeiffer or any of his ilk including Croisette, Cooke, Poisson, Tetherow, Cordaro, Macek, Moran, Roberts, or worse, Ensey (who used to be a congregation member), etc.
God is Great. God is good. God is merciful. God takes what the enemy intends for evil and uses it for good.
God bless young Croisette, who attended St. Dominic's Chapel (Father Starbuck's chapel) this morning in a suit and tie.
Please pray for him and for his family. Pray also for the other young man from OLHC who, like many here on CathInfo, got taken in by Pfeiffer (who has also attended St. Dominic's).
God bless our good, humble Father Starbuck. May Our Lady continue to protect and guide him.
-
Thank you everyone for your prayers to Our Blessed Mother and the rosaries for Fr. Starbuck. I believe God is responding to your prayers.
As a quote from the touching beautiful movie "Field of Dreams" "If You Build It They Will Come." We are now seeing God's Hand over Father Starbuck and his ever-growing success in offering of the Holiest Pre1962 Latin Mass! There was full capacity worshipers at both Masses Sunday totally approximately 130 souls!! Everyone was so gracious and loving to Father.
And now we look forward next week to the beginning of the "Live Feed" at Mass. More souls will now get to know Father as they watch his beautiful holy reverent manner he says The Latin Mass. Remember to please come early for confessions before each Mass.
Mass schedule for January 28th to 30th
January 28th - Friday 8:30 a.m.
January 29th - Saturday 8:30 a.m.
January 30th - Sunday 7:30 a.m. & 9:30 a.m.
Confessions before each Mass
-
God is Great. God is good. God is merciful. God takes what the enemy intends for evil and uses it for good.
God bless young Croisette, who attended St. Dominic's Chapel (Father Starbuck's chapel) this morning in a suit and tie.
Please pray for him and for his family. Pray also for the other young man from OLHC who, like many here on CathInfo, got taken in by Pfeiffer (who has also attended St. Dominic's).
God bless our good, humble Father Starbuck. May Our Lady continue to protect and guide him.
He was "ordained" by Pfeiffer last June and has said "mass" several times. Why was he in a suit and tie?????
How is young Mr. Cooke doing?, Is he still at OLMC? Still saying "mass"?
-
God is Great. God is good. God is merciful. God takes what the enemy intends for evil and uses it for good.
God bless young Croisette, who attended St. Dominic's Chapel (Father Starbuck's chapel) this morning in a suit and tie.
Please pray for him and for his family. Pray also for the other young man from OLHC who, like many here on CathInfo, got taken in by Pfeiffer (who has also attended St. Dominic's).
God bless our good, humble Father Starbuck. May Our Lady continue to protect and guide him.
are you sure it was Daniel Croisette who was in a suit and tie at Fr Starbuck's mass?
-
Although the wonderful history of OLHC is informative, some of the spiritually elequent posts here might be beginning to, whether intentional or unintentional, distract and divert from one of the main reasons and purpose of this thread "OLHC laypersons attempting to take over the chapel CENSOR Fr. Starbuck's sermon" AND the fact that indeed the OLHC "School Board" composed of four (4) layman have indeed already accomplished that objection by disposing OVERNIGHT (Fr. Starbuck!) He who has worked side-by-side and has been THE associate to Fr. Perez for 15 years!!
I like St. Thomas say: Judging by the conscienceless, cruel, base, unjust, and what I believe evil behavior of "The School Board" and their un-Catholic, uncharitable treatment of Fr. Starbuck , I do not trust nor do I believe in some dubious "hand-written" note purportedly written by Father Perez! All of a sudden, we're supposed to believe that there is suddenly this magical "proof" letter that Father Perez turned his back and betrayed and "ghosted" Fr. Starbuck's 15 years presence and service at OLHC. I don't believe Fr. Perez would have done such an injustice to Father Starbuck.
SO, I SAY -- PROVE IT!!
1) By immediately publicly publishing the letter and fixing a hard copy to each OLHC bulletin for all the OLHC faithful to have in their possession!
2) By hiring an impartial, unbiased, legally notarized handwriting expert! He should be given access to this purportedly hand-written letter and compare it to other established past known hand written examples of Fr. Perez's handwriting!
So I say, llike St. Thomas - I DON'T BELIEVE IT! Judging by the conscienceless, cruel, base, unjust, and in my opinion evil behavior of "The School Board's" treatment of Fr. Starbuck so again I say- Why should I trust them? Additionally, I believe they have broken "trust" with the OLHC faithfull!
In the meantime, for those who have not been fully informed nor have read previous posts here, I feel it is worthwhile re-posting these crucial concerns and facts of this thread:
Following is the important history and events that has lead to the establishment of TLM now at St. Dominic's Chapel. Father Starbuck had been and was the faithful priest/associate who worked side by side for 15 years with Father Perez (pastor of Our Lady Help of Christians) providing all the sacraments, i.e., the Mass, confessions, Baptisms, funerals, etc.
Herein is the reason Father Starbuck was not present for any of the 2021 Christmas Masses at OLHC. This is the actual sermon he gave at the 7:30 and 10:00 a.m. Masses Sunday December 19th at OLHC.
Before revealing the following sermon which was preached by Father Starbuck at OLHC, here is some shocking history of what occurred that morning of December 19th after the 7:30 a.m. Mass.
The "man" who violently banged on the confession door after the 7:30 Mass while Father Starbuck was hearing confessions is no other than the usher from the 7:30 a.m. Mass "Joel Iddings." MR. IDDINGS IS ALSO A MEMBER OF THE OLHC SCHOOL BOARD! He yelled at Father "YOU ARE NOT TO GIVE THAT SERMON AT THE 10:00 MASS!" Father was freightened by this psychological "assault."* Father felt fearful by this individual's brutal aggression against him. Mr. Iddings then ripped the mike out of its stand on the pulpit podium before the 10:00 a.m. Mass so Father would not be able to be heard giving his sermon again. Bravely, Father gave it anyway without the mike.
Sources in the parish had informed me that this "man" then ordered Father Starbuck to not come on church property again(after December 19th) and to not attempt to say the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass at all the coming Christmas week! In addition, Mr. Iddings then threatened Father Starbuck that if he were to come on the property of OLHC again, he would personally see to it that Father would be arrested for trespassing! The injustice and abusive brutality of this "man" who knows that Father Starbuck had faithfully served Our Lady Help of Christians Chapel for 15 years! This can only be characterized as the most cruel Un-Catholic like sacrilegious "Judas" act of betrayal to Father's faithful giving of himself to to Christ at OLHC for 15 years!
*Assault Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
"Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
"The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action (like viciously banging on the door of the confessional while Father is hearing confessions) might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim. Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result."
This despicable "man" "Joel Iddings" sacrilegious act should be held accountable for his "psychological assault" he perpetrated against Father Starbuck!
What makes this "psychological assault" even more treacherous is that Father is a gentle, Christ-like, charitable, loving and giving priest!
Lastly, who was responsible for the live-stream 10:00 Mass being blacked out that day which has always been live-streamed on Sundays. It was not that day! Who was responsible for that?
Here is the actual sermon Fr. Starbuck gave 7:30 a.m. on that Sunday 19 December 2021:
"I had a sermon prepared for this morning. However,there are some matters of business that do not allow deferral. Therefore, I will present that sermon at a later time.
I have always tried to be truthful and to do the right thing. And sometimes I have paid a price for that. But please know this about me: I will always try to be honest with you and to fulfill my commitment to you as a public servant and as a priest. I want to begin by saying that these past five weeks of my life have been like no others. My vocation is not a job. It demands my every moment, and my every commitment, but this is especially so these past few weeks. And this on top of so much recent loss. I have given 15 years now of my life to this parish (a quarter of my life), and I was hoping to spend the remainder of my years here. I still hope that is possible. Over these years, I have rolled with the punches, & endured intricate/delicate, indeed,often complex situations. I have held my own. But when Fr. Perez died, there was only one person here who would rightfully have pastoral seniority to succeed him; and, like it or not, that is me!
But shortly after Fr. Perez’s death, a lay board rose up asserting its legal authority to appoint the next “pastor” of this parish. I want to be clear in stating that (w/o pointing a finger at them) this is Lutheranism pure and simple. Laypeople could never have the ecclesial power or jurisdiction to appoint or create a pastor. That they may have a legal right is not the same as having a divine right. And while there are fine people on this board who engender my complete respect, the cohesion and leadership of this lay incorporation has been problematic. Nor do I see it being able to work. I did make it clear that I will not serve under another “pastor.” At the same time, I have wanted to facilitate the transition that the church is undergoing at least through the end of the year. That has been my desire.
I do not take my marching orders from laypeople. And I cannot, as a priest, answer to competing voices on a lay board.
And moreover, as a priest, my credibility, leadership,and moral responsibility could be jeopardized if a situation not yet addressed in this parish is allowed to continue. My continuous requests for the vetting of priests serving in this parish have not & are not being met. We have had a couple of “priests” coming through here whose ordination I found questionable (based on information that later became available), and we have had at least one priest who had no business being here. Yes, mistakes were made (albeit, not on my part), and we should have learned from them.
Five years ago, I proposed to Fr. Perez the following specific requirements of any priest serving in this parish. And they are the following:
1. A criminal background check with ID, performed by a reputable third party, meeting state complacency. Also, the background check that I am requesting is not just a clearance check. It must consist of a positive trace of the person’s history."
________________________________________________________________
*SupportFrStarbuck following insert:
Re: California Law - legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes
ARTICLE 2. Commission on Teacher Credentialing [44210 - 44239] ( Heading of Article 2 amended by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1355, Sec. 2.5. )
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.
___________________________________________________________________________________
*Continuation of Father's sermon:
"2. References.
3. A chronological work history.
4. Proof of ordination. And I want to know the ordaining bishop, seminary, and formational contacts. And just for your information, as a Dominican I underwent thorough background checks and continuous vetting over a period of seven years. And I lived under a virtual microscope 24 hours a day during that time. Moreover, my background is not hidden. My formation and ordination can be found on the Internet. They are public.
Of note, a request that I made of Fr. Perez last summer got dragged out, & and was never completed. And if I do not say something now, this situation will never be addressed. Let me ask a question. If you hired someone to work on your house, would you not want references? Or if you sent your children to a day care center, would you not want references? This is the house of God. Can we be any less responsible?
So here is what I am asking: A priest is a public person. Let me repeat that: A priest is a public person. Therefore, with due respect to all parties involved & a presumption of good will on the part of all, I am asking that the vetting of Fr. Wiest be completed, and that the results of that vetting process, including proof of ordination be made public.
The problem is that there is no public life of any Fr.Michael Wiest (I know this in part, not just because it cannot be found on the internet, but because I actually had a professional investigator call me one day to inform me of this. He was completely puzzled.) there is no public life of any Fr. Michael Wiest who was born in Chicago, ordained in Italy, and who served in any parish or diocese during these past 30 or so years.
There is no public record of ministry. There is no record of pastoral assignments. In short, there is no
such public person. And the fact that there is no such public person does not just amount to an absence of information, it amounts to a fact that demands explanation. It is a problem. And for this reason many in this parish question his ordination. For his own benefit we need to answer this question. And we need to know the credentials of any priest serving in this parish. That is not asking too much.
Finally, while I do not acknowledge the ecclesial authority of a lay board, if one is to exist, it must be cohesive, charitable, and committed to the principles of the Catholic faith. And if the parishioners of this church are unhappy with this arrangement, perhaps they need to consider another option, perhaps the appointment of a new board which they feel represents them. But with all due respect, I just do not see this lay board being able to resolve effectively the problems this parish faces, or to find a clear path forward. And FYI, this lay board represents the interests of the school (PPA) and not of the church.
Additionally, I do know that the board is considering (interviewing) priests who celebrate Mass according to the 1962 Roman Missal. I want to say that it has been our position that this Missal is theologically inadequate (if not modernistic). Fr. Perez vehemently rejected the 1962 Roman Missal. Moreover, it is likely to be problematic to our public celebration of Mass in this church. May I remind you of some of the problems of this Missal (?):
Revised rite of Holy Week. The famous writer Evelyn Waugh considered the revision of Holy Week to be an extremely disappointing loss.
The introduction of red on Good Friday and Communion of the faithful were arbitrary and capricious, and miss the fundamental (essential) point of the liturgy (i.e., the Mass of the Pre-Sanctified). It omits Second Confiteor. It omits numerous octaves, and accordingly significant vigils.
It omits significant feasts, such as January 1: (the Feast of the Circuмcision). The theological
significance: Christ is the fulfillment of the law!
It introduces the Feast of St. Joseph the Worker (as a concession to the tenets of socialism) It omits Commemorations.
The Passion Narrative during Holy Week is considered to be the Gospel reading. A theological fiction. Feasts of important saints are haphazardly &arbitrarily moved, making it confusing even to a priest to follow this new ordo. Feasts of historically momentous saints are suppressed.
St. Joseph is introduced to the Canon. Notably: This is the only change to the Canon since the time of St. Gregory the Great. Why such an introduction? And if this is admitted, then any change can be made to the Canon of the Mass. And the theological significance: St. Joseph was not a martyr, an exception to the list of those saints who appear in the Canon.
It is inadequate to argue that there are no doctrinal problems with this Missal, as does the SSPX. It is a deviation from the lex orandi, it is theologically inadequate, & it is misguided in numerous respects.
And even if you believe that the 1962 Roman Missal is okay, how could we serve the needs of this parish in requiring people to attend daily Mass with two missals, perhaps not knowing which priest is celebrating that day, not to mention the cost to those with less money?
And finally, finding a priest who observes and understands tradition in the same way as Fr. Perez and myself is a virtually impossible task. You will likely either encounter a sedevacantist or a modernist (who says: “Yes I celebrate the traditional ‘extraordinary form of the Roman rite’ in Latin.”, as if there could be such thing). So I advise a great note of caution in introducing any priest to this parish.
These are my concerns. You may respond as you see fitting & appropriate. However we proceed going forward, I call for civility & charity, for listening and understanding, and for a prayerful and thoughtful approach from all parties involved.
Finally, while it is not my custom, I am willing to make a transcript of these words available in a PDF file for circulation, so that my words are clear for everyone’s understanding, for those who are absent, and for the public record. I do not have the time to send this out as a response to every email inquiry. But if someone could assist me in making it available, I am glad to provide a PDF file for circulation."
Father Cedrick Starbuck
-
Message from The Board
Hi everyone - Tonight, Wednesday, Jan. 26, the school board of PPA is having a meeting in Fr. Schell Hall at 7pm - it's regarding the passing of Monsignor, his wishes, and the priests at OLHC - This meeting was originally open to only the PPA parents (who were informed this past Monday) but now, per Jennifer Martin and Marsha Odou, has been opened up to the whole parish - the board is leaving it up to word-of-mouth, thus my message here - please pass along this message to any other Parishioners that you know and who might be interested in attending - Thank you!
-
To the anonymous "We"
Point well taken (regarding repetition) . However, we're dealing with a grave injustice here! My last post dealt with NEW rumors/news related to this issue that there is some sort of "Letter" available with the OLHC "School Board." My valid NEW post/commentary is relevant & appropriate to the topic of this thread and these new rumors. What is your detached "anonymous/we" pompous investment in this matter? Rather than supercilious acting like the thread police and monitoring people's comments, what relevant & intelligent commentary have you contributed while posting here "anonymously?"
The following commentary IS relevant to the matter at hand. "Judging by the conscienceless, cruel, base, unjust, and what I believe evil behavior of "The School Board" and their un-Catholic, uncharitable treatment of Fr. Starbuck , I do not trust nor do I believe in some dubious "hand-written" note purportedly written by Father Perez! All of a sudden, we're supposed to believe that there is suddenly this magical "proof" letter and that Father Perez turned his back and betrayed Fr. Starbuck's 15 years service at OLHC. I don't believe that Fr. Perez would have done such an injustice to Father Starbuck.
SO, I SAY -- PROVE IT BY SHOWING THE LETTER!!
1) By immediately publicly publishing the letter and fixing a hard copy to each OLHC bulletin for all the OLHC faithful to have in their possession!
2) By hiring an impartial, unbiased, legally notarized handwriting expert! He should be given access to this purportedly "hand-written letter" and compare it to other established past known hand written examples of Fr. Perez's handwriting!
Like St. Thomas - I DON'T BELIEVE IT until I see it! Judging by the school boards conscienceless, cruel & base behavior, why should I trust them? I believe they have broken "Trust" with the OLHC faithful!"
-
Father's Starbuck Revised Mass Schedule
Due to a scheduling conflict, I am unable to have the 8:30 a.m. Mass on Saturday morning in my chapel. I am terribly sorry about this. However, I will have Mass on Friday morning, as scheduled, and I am able to offer a first Friday Mass (the following week) in the afternoon at 4:00 PM. The following is my schedule for the coming week. After this, things should hopefully start to get into a more solid pattern.
January 28-30:
Friday: 8:30 a.m.
Saturday: No Mass
Sunday: 7:30 & 9:30 a.m.
First Week of February:
Wednesday: 8:30 a.m., Candlemas
Friday: 4:00 p.m., First Friday
Saturday: 8:30 a.m., First Saturday
Sunday: 7:30 & 9:30 a.m.
-
To the anonymous "We"
Point well taken (regarding repetition) . However, we're dealing with a grave injustice here! My last post dealt with NEW rumors/news related to this issue that there is some sort of "Letter" available with the OLHC "School Board." My valid NEW post/commentary is relevant & appropriate to the topic of this thread and these new rumors. What is your detached "anonymous/we" pompous investment in this matter? Rather than supercilious acting like the thread police and monitoring people's comments, what relevant & intelligent commentary have you contributed while posting here "anonymously?"
This font is too big.
-
Thank you to all who joined together in praying the 54-day Novena Rosary to Our Lady of the Rosary for the rot to be rooted out of the chapel and for protection and guidance for Father Starbuck.
Today is day 27 of our prayers of petition, and tomorrow we continue our novena of Rosaries in thanksgiving to Our Lady and Our Lord.
-
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.
It’s bad enough that the NAORCC is illegitimate, but it’s worse than that. Bishop Rematt’s branch of the Old Catholic Church grew out of a cult called the New Jerusalem Church of the Celestial Messenger which was founded by Giuseppe Maria Abbate, a barber who says that Jesus walked into his barber shop one day and told him that God had chosen him as his Celestial Messenger, ordering him found a new church. Then he claims that Jesus personally ordained him to the priesthood. (Therefore, no papers of ordination.)
Then, he says, 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?)
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.
And Rematt “ordained” Wiest. And the school board has the letter to prove it.
At the meeting no questions were permitted. When people started asking questions, they were told to leave and the lights were turned off. Prior to the abrupt closing of the meeting, it was announced that the son of the board member/ principal was being named as the 5th board member.
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/
-
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.
It’s bad enough that the NAORCC is illegitimate, but it’s worse than that. Bishop Rematt’s branch of the Old Catholic Church grew out of a cult called the New Jerusalem Church of the Celestial Messenger which was founded by Giuseppe Maria Abbate, a barber who says that Jesus walked into his barber shop one day and told him that God had chosen him as his Celestial Messenger, ordering him found a new church. Then he claims that Jesus personally ordained him to the priesthood. (Therefore, no papers of ordination.)
Then, he says, 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?)
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.
And Rematt “ordained” Wiest. And the school board has the letter to prove it.
At the meeting no questions were permitted. When people started asking questions, they were told to leave and the lights were turned off. Prior to the abrupt closing of the meeting, it was announced that the son of the board member/ principal was being named as the 5th board member.
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/
So Wiest is not a Catholic priest.
get him out of there people....
-
Yeah, right. He can't find his license!
Should be "Red Flag"the suspicious behavior that the meeting was abruptly ended with the turning out the lights and told the meeting is over obviously some people had questions? Also wasn't it suspicious that was there was only 6 hours notice of a upcoming meeting at 7:00 p.m. of such a very serious matter involving ALL THE FAITHFUL OF OLHC?
IF we indeed find out that this man is not a priest, shouldn't those of us who trusted in the leadership of OLHC ("The Board) be angry, outraged and horrified to think that we the faithful were unknowingly suckered into this lie?
What about those of us who went to confession to this individual and to think of the possibility that this individual might not be a priest?
Shouldn't there be some serious consequences paid by the ("School Board") and this "Fr." Michael Wiest? To think that we went to confession to him and it was all a lie! What about being suckered into believing he was a priest and actually we did not receive the Body and Blood of Christ (IF TRUE) because he is not a validly ordained priest! Isn't this in some way criminal and at least grounds for a class action suit from the faithful of OLHC against ("The Board") and Wiest? Any lawyers here??
-
Father Perez’s death was totally unexpected, and at the time of the writing of this purported letter he would not know if his sister would pre-decease him or not. It makes no sense whatsoever that he would supposedly give only one copy to one person.
If any such letter actually existed, Father Perez would have given a copy to Father Starbuck and several key members of the parish, but not to the four school board members because that would appear to be an obvious conflict of interest. (Look we found this letter which gives us total control!)
The following have yet to be verified:
Whether this purported "letter" actually exists or not,
whether this purported "letter" was actually written by Father Perez or not,
whether this purported "letter" was ever in the hands of Father Perez's sister or not.
Given the earlier versions of the school board’s stories, strong reasons exist to doubt their veracity.
Cogent arguments, Cera! Thank you.
The "School Board" should be asked to make a copies of this "handwritten letter" and attach it to every OLHC Sunday bulletin to be handed out after Mass to ALL the faithful at the chapel!
THE only way to really find out if this "letter" was actually written by Fr. Perez is to have a forensic handwriting expert analyze it and compare it to ANY previous handwritten examples from Fr. Perez that have nothing to do with "The Board." Judging by their ongoing and past behavior, there are indeed "strong reasons [that] exist to doubt their veracity."
If "The Board" has indeed nothing to hide, then they should prove that they indeed... have NOTHING TO HIDE!
BTW, it is a "red flag" (IF TRUE) that "The Board" had refused to take questions after the meeting (WHY?). This after the lights were turned out, and the faithful were abruptly told that the meeting had ended!! If anyone who is reading this and was present at the meeting, please verify that this indeed was what happened?
-
Grace-filled beautiful blessings from God to Fr. Starbuck today! A magnificent successful day at Fr. Starbuck's St, Dominic's Chapel. There were 50 souls at the 7:30 Mass and 65 souls at the 9:30 a.m. Mass. Almost standing room only! Father was so pleased.
In addition, today was the first day of the live "feed" on UTube of the Mass entitled "St. Dominic's Chapel (Fr. Cedrik Starbuck). It can be seen anytime now. As of now, there are 307 views today! A wonderfully successful day for God's servant Fr. Starbuck!
-
are you sure it was Daniel Croisette who was in a suit and tie at Fr Starbuck's mass?
Given that his recent “Masses” can be viewed on 10 Year Old Girl Productions’ YouTube channel, I don’t see how that would be possible.
-
So Wiest is not a Catholic priest.
get him out of there people....
So he's not a Catholic priest, he is in a cult, and he is mentally ill because he is not only pretending to be a priest, but lying about this, that, and the other thing, and refuses to provide proper ID because he obviously is hiding one or more things? (And may also be a pedo TBD). YIKES.
"Mars?" LOL.
And people here on the forums have told me that I need new Priests? BWAHAHA, LOL. RTFL.
(Psst...one of my Priests can directly trace his ordination to Pope Saint Pius X--He's a wonderful Priest! We were blessed to be able to get to a beautiful High Mass today for the Feast of the Presentation of Our Lady, with the choir and church procession, blessing of the candles, all of it--One of my favourite feast days--the end of Christmas, and time to take down the Nativity scenes tomorrow--about all the energy I have at the moment, but at least the snow held off long enough to get there and get home--Thanks, God--We said our Rosary on the way home, and I included all those people that couldn't get to Mass today).
Anyway, this Wiest guy is committing fraud and/or impersonation of a religious figure at least.
Someone needs to contact the SSPX US headquarters in KC AT ONCE and *inform them* that this man is a priest, and is sharing the same altar as Father Alphonsus. Go right to the top, and see what they do about it, even though it's not an SSPX Chapel, SSPX Priests have said Mass there.
If the incompetent "board" at OLHC won't get rid of this man, then put pressure on someone else to do it. BUT just make sure he doesn't run off with all the money/bank information/land/etc. first!
Hire a private investigator to keep tabs on him 24/7, and hire a lawyer to sue him, the school board, etc. There is a crime if you write a bad cheque and well, there's a crime if you commit fraud in other ways, too.
Pull your kids out of the school, and DON'T GIVE ONE DIME for tuition or collections, or anything else. Hit them in the wallet.
*****And if you "went to Mass and/or confession to this Weist?" GO FIND A GOOD PRIEST, tell him what happened, and make arrangements for a GENERAL CONFESSION!!*****
Talk to Father Alphonsus or go up to Los Gatos, SSPX Retreat Centre if need be. A general confession will not only cleanse the soul, but bring peace of mind in more ways than one. They are not hard to do, but the Priest needs the courtesy of time for them--don't just spring it on him.
God bless, Anne
P.S. Docuмent EVERYTHING and provide valid proof, otherwise, all you have is nothing. You need evidence to hold up in a court if you want to sue this person or anyone else.
-
So he's not a Catholic priest, he is in a cult, and he is mentally ill because he is not only pretending to be a priest, but lying about this, that, and the other thing, and refuses to provide proper ID because he obviously is hiding one or more things? (And may also be a pedo TBD). YIKES.
"Mars?" LOL.
And people here on the forums have told me that I need new Priests? BWAHAHA, LOL. RTFL.
(Psst...one of my Priests can directly trace his ordination to Pope Saint Pius X--He's a wonderful Priest! We were blessed to be able to get to a beautiful High Mass today for the Feast of the Presentation of Our Lady, with the choir and church procession, blessing of the candles, all of it--One of my favourite feast days--the end of Christmas, and time to take down the Nativity scenes tomorrow--about all the energy I have at the moment, but at least the snow held off long enough to get there and get home--Thanks, God--We said our Rosary on the way home, and I included all those people that couldn't get to Mass today).
Anyway, this Wiest guy is committing fraud and/or impersonation of a religious figure at least.
Someone needs to contact the SSPX US headquarters in KC AT ONCE and *inform them* that this man is a priest, and is sharing the same altar as Father Alphonsus. Go right to the top, and see what they do about it, even though it's not an SSPX Chapel, SSPX Priests have said Mass there.
If the incompetent "board" at OLHC won't get rid of this man, then put pressure on someone else to do it. BUT just make sure he doesn't run off with all the money/bank information/land/etc. first!
Hire a private investigator to keep tabs on him 24/7, and hire a lawyer to sue him, the school board, etc. There is a crime if you write a bad cheque and well, there's a crime if you commit fraud in other ways, too.
Pull your kids out of the school, and DON'T GIVE ONE DIME for tuition or collections, or anything else. Hit them in the wallet.
*****And if you "went to Mass and/or confession to this Weist?" GO FIND A GOOD PRIEST, tell him what happened, and make arrangements for a GENERAL CONFESSION!!*****
Talk to Father Alphonsus or go up to Los Gatos, SSPX Retreat Centre if need be. A general confession will not only cleanse the soul, but bring peace of mind in more ways than one. They are not hard to do, but the Priest needs the courtesy of time for them--don't just spring it on him.
God bless, Anne
P.S. Docuмent EVERYTHING and provide valid proof, otherwise, all you have is nothing. You need evidence to hold up in a court if you want to sue this person or anyone
VERY good suggestion.
-
I took the advice of the good and holy people on these threads and obtained my Sherlock Holmes On-Line Private Eye Detective Diploma and did a whole bunch of cool research. I have it on good evidence that the "BOARD" was on the Grassy Knoll in Dallas on November 22nd, 1963. Also, it is only on circuмstantial evidence, but still strong evidence from a bunch of old women who have too much time on their hands and love to gossip about things that they made up, know nothing about or just plain love to calumniate, that the "BOARD'S" "MONEY-GRUBBING" and "POWER-GRABBING" or was that "MONEY-GRABBING" and "POWER-GRUBBING?" (I forget) resulted in the 2008 Subprime Mortgage Crisis. It is also possible that "WEIRDNESS OF WIEST" led to various tsunamis around the world and, quite possibly, a heat wave in Greenland.
I wonder when it is all said and done the people that wrote so much about what they don't know about will apologize and rush to the confessional and try to amend for the evil they have done. Reading this group, probably not.
However, one thing is for sure, it has been good for a laugh or two except for the people that they have harmed.
-
Also, it is only on circuмstantial evidence, but still strong evidence from a bunch of old women who have too much time on their hands and love to gossip about things that they made up, know nothing about or just plain love to calumniate, that the "BOARD'S" "MONEY-GRUBBING" and "POWER-GRABBING" or was that "MONEY-GRABBING" and "POWER-GRUBBING?"
I wonder when it is all said and done the people that wrote so much about what they don't know about will apologize and rush to the confessional and try to amend for the evil they have done. Reading this group, probably not.
[. . .]
However, one thing is for sure, it has been good for a laugh or two except for the people that they have harmed.
I agree that individuals should not be eager to throw dirt on the good name of others, lest they sin by calumny or detraction.
Nevertheless, I think it's highly probable that Wiest's orders through Rematt are invalid, and that he is actually a layman.
Consequently, there is a real possibility that those who confessed their sins to him actually need to confess those sins, again, to a real priest in order to receive absolution, and also probable that parishioners were actually not participating at Mass, but only at an event they thought was Mass.
-
I agree that individuals should not be eager to throw dirt on the good name of others, lest they sin by calumny or detraction.
Nevertheless, I think it's highly probable that Wiest's orders through Rematt are invalid, and that he is actually a layman.
Consequently, there is a real possibility that those who confessed their sins to him actually need to confess those sins, again, to a real priest in order to receive absolution, and also probable that parishioners were actually not participating at Mass, but only at an event they thought was Mass.
What makes it worse is that this is the second time we've been in this predicament. The admitted child-molester Colletti had been laicized and in order to receive his pension, and he had agreed to never present himself as a Catholic priest and to never say a public Mass. So for a year he heard our confessions and said Mass. And when the truth finally came out, the only priest who spoke the truth was Father Starbuck. Our other priest covered up for Colletti by saying "He was called back to his diocese." So if you went to one Mass you heard the truth; if you went to another Mass you were deceived. This explains why some people continue to support Colletti.
Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
-
What a sad state of affairs. Another reason I'm very wary about "independent priests" and "independent chapels" that reports to no one.
-
What a sad state of affairs. Another reason I'm very wary about "independent priests" and "independent chapels" that reports to no one.
Indeed.
especially since Canon law says that each priest MUST report to a bishop superior, if only to get new holy oils once a year.
-
I am wondering any further news about "Fr." Wiest's presence at OLHC? It seem that he has been feeling the heat from our efforts here and I heard from a source today that he is staying low key and in a somewhat retreating mode and saying Mass?? only at certain family's homes not at OLHC. Is that true?
-
God's grace has abundantly favored Father Starbuck today! More and more souls are showing their love, loyalty and devotion to our beloved Father and his beautiful (pre-1962 Missal) Latin Mass. God is giving the grace of discernment and truth to more and more souls in finding the truth regarding the injustice Father endured when he was forced out of OLHC after 15 years of unwavering faithful loyalty! I believe God will severely punish those individuals who deliberately willed and did hurt Father by their almost assault-like aggression to Father by casting him out with the threat of "having him arrested if he ever set foot on OLHC property again" mere days before Christmas as outlined in the earlier written blogs herein.
In any event, there were 75 souls at the 7:30 a.m. Mass at St. Dominic's Chapel today (Standing room only). There was 45 souls at the 9:30 a.m. and 45 souls at the 12:00 Masses. Many confessions... Father is available for confession before all three Masses. A rarity indeed in all of Orange County's Catholic churches. Father is so generous and giving of his time and energy. In addition, the rosary was recited to Our Blessed Mother before all Masses.
Anyone... I am wondering if there is any further news about "Fr." Wiest's presence at OLHC? It seem that he has been feeling the heat from our efforts here at CatholicInfo.com and I heard that he is deliberately staying low key and is in a somewhat retreating mode saying Mass?? only at certain individual's homes but NOT at OLHC! Is that true? Any news Anyone?
IF it turns out to be true, why with all of the what appears to be a Fraud perpetrated by "Fr." Wiest as to his true identification, I don't feel he should be given the opportunity to simply "cut and run" now without seeing to it that there should be consequences if their was indeed any sort of Fraud perpetrated on the faithful of OLHC. I also believe their should be consequences for "The Board" who (if true) provided "cover" for this man! AFTER ALL I WENT TO CONFESSION TO THIS MAN AND i BELIEVED I RECEIVED THE BODY & BLOOD OF JESUS FROM THIS MAN TO ONLY POSSIBLY MADE A FOOL OF.
-
Abbate “ordained” Schweikert and after Abbate died, Archbishop Schweikert was enthroned in 1968 as the Celestial Messenger’s successor.
This statement is not true. While I absolutely do not support these schismatic Old Catholics, we cannot spread falsehoods.
This "Abbate" did not ordain nor consecrate Schweikert. Schweikert was consecrated by Sigismund Vipartas (consecrated by Carfora), thus he would have had valid (but schismatic) orders through the Old Catholics.
Schweikert did not accept Abbate as having valid orders.
-
This statement is not true. While I absolutely do not support these schismatic Old Catholics, we cannot spread falsehoods.
This "Abbate" did not ordain nor consecrate Schweikert. Schweikert was consecrated by Sigismund Vipartas (consecrated by Carfora), thus he would have had valid (but schismatic) orders through the Old Catholics.
Schweikert did not accept Abbate as having valid orders.
Schweikert was correct in not accepting Abbate as having valid orders, seeing that Abbate was deluded into believed that he was "ordained" by Jesus after He (Jesus) walked into Abbate's barber shop and sat down in Abbate's barber chair. Abbate had no actual ordination, so of course Schweikert could not accept Abbate as having a valid ordination.
Schweikert did not allow his doubts regarding whether or not Abbate was a priest or a lunatic interfere with his decision to take over Abbate's cult and the financial control that went with it.
It is known that Schweikert was ordained several times, leading some to believe that one of those unexplained ordinations was by Abbate when he chose Schweikert to take over control of the cult (who believed that Abbate was told by Jesus that he was first born on Mars, then died and was reincarnated, but continued to travel back to Mars periodically.) Abbate was repeatedly ruled insane and incarcerated, he also repeatedly raped teen-age girls who had joined his order of pseudo-nuns.
-
Don't know if its true or not (correct me if I'm wrong), but the last word I've heard is that Wiest has been asked to leave by the OLHC board and he refuses to do so. I understands he continues to stay at a place that is funded by OLHC faithful (Our money!). At this point, he is basically a shamed fraud/con man who is hunkered down in a place like a criminal on the run!
A triumphant victory for our dear Father Starbuck who was a victim and was abused by Wiest with the evil blessings of "the board" at OLHC. A fraud has been perpetrated and Wiest and "the board" (particularly the individual who banged on the door terrorizing Father while he was in the confessional that Sunday morning should be penalized for their actions!). There should be just consequences paid by Wiest, the Board and this despicable individual! Wiest should not be given the chance of simply fleeing! I believe the fraud he committed was is in some way a criminal act! Does anyone here have any further information or development about Wiest?
-
If anyone feels that the Holy Ghost might prompt them accordingly, Father Starbuck is in need of a Baptismal Font! I found one on Ebay for his new chapel at St. Dominics! Father has not directed me to do this, but I thought I might try and surprise Father by asking those here who believe in Father's devotion/cause of saying the TLM (pre-1962 Missal) to please contribute in buying this beautiful used traditional Baptismal Font on Ebay!
As I said before, Father has many new expenses for St. Dominics and Father is struggling to keep up with the many ever-growing financial demands that he is trying to handle all by himself! So, if you find it in your heart, continue to please generously help Father on Sundays as much as you can . I will post a photo of the used Baptismal Font tomorrow. It cost's $1,600 plus shipping and it is beautiful!
Checks MUST be made out to:
"Father Cedrik Starbuck" NOT St. Dominic's Chapel.
P.O.B. 427
Tustin, CA 92781
Let's all (with God's abundant grace on Father) make St. Dominic's Chapel a beautiful example and success for the world to see in which we will be awarded by God for our devotion to Father Starbuck, the TLM (pre-1962 Missal!) and Our Blessed Mother!
God bless you all
-
I'm still troubled by the situation of the old nun who died, presumably of starvation, who had sought help from your chapel. Didn't Fr. Starbuck refuse to let her onto chapel property? I don't think that was ever really explained. Though maybe there's a reasonable explanation.
-
I'm still troubled by the situation of the old nun who died, presumably of starvation, who had sought help from your chapel. Didn't Fr. Starbuck refuse to let her onto chapel property? I don't think that was ever really explained. Though maybe there's a reasonable explanation.
I would like to know what happened to the nun's body. Was she decently buried? Is the body still lying unclaimed in the morgue? Where did she die?
-
I'm still troubled by the situation of the old nun who died, presumably of starvation, who had sought help from your chapel. Didn't Fr. Starbuck refuse to let her onto chapel property? I don't think that was ever really explained. Though maybe there's a reasonable explanation.
Agreed.
Fr. Starbuck DID refuse to let her onto chapel property and threatened to call the police on her.
There is no reasonable explanation.
Fr. Perez claims she was not a nun but Fr. Sretenovic witnessed her final vows.
Fr. Perez, God rest his soul, was no Fr. Schell, God rest his soul. Fr. Perez allowed questionable clerics to say mass and have access to the laity and children without vetting them, but came down on a little, old, sickly, carmelite nun who's vows were witnessed by Fr. Sretenovic.
She surely died a Carmelite death, God rest her soul.
-
I would like to know what happened to the nun's body. Was she decently buried? Is the body still lying unclaimed in the morgue? Where did she die?
Fr. Sretenovic buried her.
-
Agreed.
Fr. Starbuck DID refuse to let her onto chapel property and threatened to call the police on her.
There is no reasonable explanation.
Fr. Perez claims she was not a nun but Fr. Sretenovic witnessed her final vows.
Fr. Perez, God rest his soul, was no Fr. Schell, God rest his soul. Fr. Perez allowed questionable clerics to say mass and have access to the laity and children without vetting them, but came down on a little, old, sickly, carmelite nun who's vows were witnessed by Fr. Sretenovic.
She surely died a Carmelite death, God rest her soul.
Colletti, Weist, and Croisette.
There may have been more.
-
Two things
Issue # One:
1) Upon further visualization/research it appears that this particular baptismal font has some obvious inscription of it belonging in the past to a Luthern Church which might not be appropriate for St. Dominic's Chapel.
Issue # Two:
RE: Postings from "Meg" & " dymphnaw's"
Let me just say, these "troubled"scurrilous innuendo, defamatorY-ladened macabre suggestions that somehow and in some way... Father Starbuck was responsible for the "starvation" of sister AND that the "old nun's body [was] lying there [being]unclaimed" was also Father's Starbuck's fault is grossly inappropriate and is infuriating!
Let me first say,
I know absolutely nothing of the specifics and conditions of sister's death!
You both obviously do not personally know Father and of his profound charity and his loving Christ-like loving concern for others. I've personally witnessed this during his 15 years of profound priestly service and have seen hundreds of examples of loving service to OLHC faithful!
To scurrilously suggest otherwise, is in my opinion a satanic, evil lie! Were either one of you members of OLHC or did you personally know Father?
Again, except for some vague rumors, which I can't remember the specifics of, I know nothing of the factual specifics s of sister's death or the conditions thereof. One thing I do know is that sister suffered years from serious Diabetes. I think her condition was always serious and her life was always untenable. I do know that Fr. Perez and Fr. Starbuck tried to provide for her loving comfort and friendship at OLHC for years! Which she had! A place of refuge for her to be at home at and... most importantly - RECEIVE THE SACRAMENTS!
(https://www.cathinfo.com/profile/epiphany/)
"epiphany!"
Do you or did you know Father Starbuck? Were you or are you a member of OLHC? "THE BOARD?" If you were/are a member, did you ever try and help sister in any way? I did!!
-
Colletti, Weist, and Croisette.
There may have been more.
The correct spelling is "Wiest".
By the way, two questions: Is he still at OLHC...and if not, who are the priests currently saying Mass there?
If anyone on this forum is a parishioner there, perhaps they'd care to give us a quick summary of the state of the chapel. Thanks in advance.
-
"epiphany!"
Do you or did you know Father Starbuck? Were you or are you a member of OLHC? "THE BOARD?" If you were/are a member, did you ever try and help sister in any way? I did!!
Yes, my family knows Fr. Starbuck well.
Yes, we were members of OLHC a long time. We drew the line and left when, from the pulpit, Fr. Perez introduced Daniel Croisette as a legit deacon ("ordained" by Fr. Pfeiffer) and allowed him to distribute Holy Communion.
Yes, we helped sister more than we should have, financially. I am glad to hear you helped her. Few did.
Sister had no transportation and not enough money for food, much less rent. She spent many days without food.
Sister spent many nights sleeping on the bench outside the chapel after Fr. Perez prohibited her from sleeping inside the chapel or school hall.
When sister complained about Fr. Perez allowing Fr. Colletti, convicted laicised perv, to say mass at OLHC, Fr. Perez forbade her from entering the chapel.
When she defied Fr. Perez, Fr. Starbuck contacted sister and told her the police would be called to arrest her if she entered OLHC property.
It is unknown why Fr. Starbuck would do such a thing, but the fact remains that he did.
The fact also remains that while OLHC supported two other nuns in a three-bedroom house (and then one sole nun after the oldest nun died), Fr. Perez and the OLHC board absolutely would not allow the carmelite nun to live in the house with the other nun.
I do not disparage Fr. Perez, Fr. Starbuck or the OLHC board, but the facts are the facts.
Sister surely died a true carmelite death.
-
Issue # Two:
RE: Postings from "Meg" & " dymphnaw's"
Let me just say, these "troubled"scurrilous innuendo, defamatorY-ladened macabre suggestions that somehow and in some way... Father Starbuck was responsible for the "starvation" of sister AND that the "old nun's body [was] lying there [being]unclaimed" was also Father's Starbuck's fault is grossly inappropriate and is infuriating!
Let me first say,
I know absolutely nothing of the specifics and conditions of sister's death!
You both obviously do not personally know Father and of his profound charity and his loving Christ-like loving concern for others. I've personally witnessed this during his 15 years of profound priestly service and have seen hundreds of examples of loving service to OLHC faithful!
To scurrilously suggest otherwise, is in my opinion a satanic, evil lie! Were either one of you members of OLHC or did you personally know Father?
Again, except for some vague rumors, which I can't remember the specifics of, I know nothing of the factual specifics s of sister's death or the conditions thereof. One thing I do know is that sister suffered years from serious Diabetes. I think her condition was always serious and her life was always untenable. I do know that Fr. Perez and Fr. Starbuck tried to provide for her loving comfort and friendship at OLHC for years! Which she had! A place of refuge for her to be at home at and... most importantly - RECEIVE THE SACRAMENTS!
How can you say Fr. Starbuck had no fault in sister's death when, by your own mouth, you "know nothing of the specifics and conditions of sister's death"?
I am not suggesting that Fr. Starbuck had any fault in her death. No one has.
But the facts remain:
- a nun at OLHC went days and nights without food, water or housing, in full knowledge of Fr. Starbuck, Fr. Perez, and the laity.
- sister was not allowed to live in a three bedroom house with one other nun who was supported by OLHC.
- Fr. Starbuck told sister the police would be called to arrest her if she entered OLHC property.
I do not deny that Fr. Starbuck is a good and holy priest, but the facts of his actions remain.
-
'splain how Debbie could be a Carmelite nun. A NON-CARMELITE CAN'T WELCOME ANYONE INTO THE CARMELITES. That's a fact. She has quite a history. In & out of several convents. To portray her as a Carmelite or any other nun, does a vast injustice to all true Carmelites & other true nuns. The circus there had false 'priests' & no one did much about it, now you want to say that Debbie was a nun!!! She was a poor misguided soul for sure that could have used some help - but NOT as a nun, PLEASE!! Perhaps if she'd been honest & just went there as a woman needing help, people would have helped her. Dishonesty will get you nowhere & rightly so. Why didn't she apply for Food Stamps &/or Welfare? Again I repeat: To call yourself a Carmelite or any other name as a nun when you are not one is a SIN & buying into all the foolishness. Why did she hang around OLHC? Because that's where all the fakes seem to congregate?
If you're really into this nonsense, then I insist you call me what I am: Mother Superior :incense::fryingpan::jester:
-
'splain how Debbie could be a Carmelite nun. A NON-CARMELITE CAN'T WELCOME ANYONE INTO THE CARMELITES. That's a fact. She has quite a history. In & out of several convents. To portray her as a Carmelite or any other nun, does a vast injustice to all true Carmelites & other true nuns. The circus there had false 'priests' & no one did much about it, now you want to say that Debbie was a nun!!! She was a poor misguided soul for sure that could have used some help - but NOT as a nun, PLEASE!! Perhaps if she'd been honest & just went there as a woman needing help, people would have helped her. Dishonesty will get you nowhere & rightly so. Why didn't she apply for Food Stamps &/or Welfare? Again I repeat: To call yourself a Carmelite or any other name as a nun when you are not one is a SIN & buying into all the foolishness. Why did she hang around OLHC? Because that's where all the fakes seem to congregate?
If you're really into this nonsense, then I insist you call me what I am: Mother Superior :incense::fryingpan::jester:
Fr. Sretenovic witnessed her final vows.
She died a nun and to say otherwise is detraction.
-
Since when can a non-Carmelite witness the vows of a Carmelite?! Talk about total chaos. Can't you see how allowing this paves the way to be infiltrated by anyone seeking to destroy the Order or allowing those with no vocation to simply call themselves Carmelite? Ask any Carmelite or Dominican or Benedictine. Can't you see how this all doesn't make sense? Educate yourself & stop the delusions. Real Catholicism is orderly & logical.
btw - didn't Debbie herself drop the Carmelite title & said she was just a hermit?
Why you continue to buy into Debbie being a Carmelite boggles the mind - it makes no sense. You are as deluded as she was - poor soul.
-
Since when can a non-Carmelite witness the vows of a Carmelite?!
Doesn't matter.
The fact remains that Fr. Sretenovic witnessed her final vows.
End of story.
-
When sister complained about Fr. Perez allowing Fr. Colletti, convicted laicised perv, to say mass at OLHC, Fr. Perez forbade her from entering the chapel.
That is simply not true. The first person to tell us that Colletti was a laicised child molester was Father Starbuck, who told us from the pulpit. Father Perez lied and covered up for Colletti by saying from the pulpit "Father Colletti has been called back to his diocese." Debbie had nothing to do with it.
-
That is simply not true. The first person to tell us that Colletti was a laicised child molester was Father Starbuck, who told us from the pulpit. Father Perez lied and covered up for Colletti by saying from the pulpit "Father Colletti has been called back to his diocese." Debbie had nothing to do with it.
I didn't say sister was the first person to tell OLHC that fr. Colletti was a laicised perv. Please read better, Cera.
-
I didn't say sister was the first person to tell OLHC that fr. Colletti was a laicised perv. Please read better, Cera.
Can someone explain why Fr. Perez showed such poor judgement?
-
I didn't say sister was the first person to tell OLHC that fr. Colletti was a laicised perv. Please read better, Cera.
You said that the reason Debbie was asked to leave OLHC (which was actually for her to stop begging at the chapel) was because she told Father Perez about Colletti. That's simply untrue.
No one knew about Colletti until Father Starbuck told us the truth. Many of those who heard the truth then asked Father Perez to get rid of Colletti. None of the others who complained to Father Perez about Colletti were asked to leave the chapel.
Obviously she was not asked to leave for the reason you say; the reason was her being a laywoman, yet presenting herself as a nun (with various names) and her non-stop begging. Let us pray for her.
-
You said that the reason Debbie was asked to leave OLHC (which was actually for her to stop begging at the chapel) was because she told Father Perez about Colletti. That's simply untrue.
No one knew about Colletti until Father Starbuck told us the truth. Many of those who heard the truth then asked Father Perez to get rid of Colletti. None of the others who complained to Father Perez about Colletti were asked to leave the chapel.
Obviously she was not asked to leave for the reason you say; the reason was her being a laywoman, yet presenting herself as a nun (with various names) and her non-stop begging. Let us pray for her.
Cera, please learn to read.
What I actually said was:
"When sister complained about Fr. Perez allowing Fr. Colletti, convicted laicised perv, to say mass at OLHC, Fr. Perez forbade her from entering the chapel.
"When she defied Fr. Perez, Fr. Starbuck contacted sister and told her the police would be called to arrest her if she entered OLHC property."
And it is absolutely true.
Fr. Sretenovic witnessed her final vows.
For you to continue to insist she was not a real nun is not only detraction about her but also about fr. Sretenovic.
She was a carmelite nun who lived and died a true carmelite to the end. God rest her soul.
OLHC should hang their heads in shame at how they treated her.
-
Can someone explain why Fr. Perez showed such poor judgement?
Fr. Perez believed: if it walks like a priest and talks like a priest then treat it as a priest until proven otherwise.
-
No, that's not the reason.:fryingpan:
-
Then you must explain how non-Carmelite Fr. Stretenovic can make her a Carmelite. You must quote a valid priest or Carmelite.
-
No, that's not the reason.:fryingpan:
Well, it's the reason Fr. Perez gave me...
-
Then you must explain how non-Carmelite Fr. Stretenovic can make her a Carmelite. You must quote a valid priest or Carmelite.
You and Cera need to go back to first grade and learn to read.
No one said Fr. Sretenovic made sister a carmelite.
I said: "Fr. Sretenovic witnessed her final vows."
For you to continue to insist she was not a real nun is not only detraction about her but also about fr. Sretenovic.
Sister lived and died a carmelite life, thanks in part to many at OLHC who did not help her with even the basic necessities of life (food, water and shelter) and actively persecuted her, including Fr. Starbuck who told her the police would be called if she set foot on OHLC property. You should all hang your heads in shame.
God rest her soul.
-
When a priest witnesses final vows - isn't that "making her a Carmelite'? If not, then what makes a Carmelite? What does 'final vows' mean to you? What Carmelite welcomed Debbie into the Carmelites? A Mother Superior of the Carmelites had to be there as well to witness this. Otherwise there is no order - anyone can be a Carmelite just by wishing - in your mind. Can't you see, can't you fathom, what chaos this would cause as ANYONE- worthy or not - could be a "Carmelite'.
Suppose I go over to your house & welcomed all the homeless in. Would they now have your name & be your responsibility? Can't you see what chaos this would cause? Are you really this dense or just stubborn to face facts?
You & only you can welcome people in. A Carmelite & only a Carmelite can welcome someone into the Order. Face REALITY, epiphany.
I'm done with you & your delusions. If you can't see this, then you're HOPELESS.
-
When a priest witnesses final vows - isn't that "making her a Carmelite'? If not, then what makes a Carmelite? What does 'final vows' mean to you? What Carmelite welcomed Debbie into the Carmelites? A Mother Superior of the Carmelites had to be there as well to witness this. Otherwise there is no order - anyone can be a Carmelite just by wishing - in your mind. Can't you see, can't you fathom, what chaos this would cause as ANYONE- worthy or not - could be a "Carmelite'.
Suppose I go over to your house & welcomed all the homeless in. Would they now have your name & be your responsibility? Can't you see what chaos this would cause? Are you really this dense or just stubborn to face facts?
You & only you can welcome people in. A Carmelite & only a Carmelite can welcome someone into the Order. Face REALITY, epiphany.
I'm done with you & your delusions. If you can't see this, then you're HOPELESS.
Cutting all the emotionalism aside, are we to understand that people walked by this woman every Sunday and ignored her? Did she die on the sidewalk? Unless she was causing a disturbance why was she threatened with arrest? Why accept any guy who showed up claiming to be a priest and come down on this woman? More and more I'm convinced that these independent chapels are bad news and despite really liking Fr. Perez from his interviews it looks like he had terrible judgement.
-
You and Cera need to go back to first grade and learn to read.
No one said Fr. Sretenovic made sister a carmelite.
I said: "Fr. Sretenovic witnessed her final vows."
For you to continue to insist she was not a real nun is not only detraction about her but also about fr. Sretenovic.
Sister lived and died a carmelite life, thanks in part to many at OLHC who did not help her with even the basic necessities of life (food, water and shelter) and actively persecuted her, including Fr. Starbuck who told her the police would be called if she set foot on OHLC property. You should all hang your heads in shame.
God rest her soul.
If anyone should be hanging her head in shame, it is you Epiphany. You are the one engaging in calumny against a good and faithful priest.
Out of Christian charity I have refrained from speaking the facts. But as you and others have continued to attack a good and holy priest, I must speak out with the facts as personally told to me by Debbie.
Debbie, God rest her soul, was a laywoman for the first 60 years of her life, when she decided she wanted to be a nun and sewed a her own habit. She personally told me that she had a "high-power career in New York" and "shopped only at the most expensive department stores" and bought "only the most expensive designer suits".
She also told me she had two grown sons. Where were they and why did they not help out their aging mother?
Debbie was troubled,had mental and emotional problems, and repeatedly changed her name. I forget her other names prior to Sister Anastasia, but one was Sister Maria de Torres.
She left OLHC numerous times for greener pastures. Once I remember she told me she was going to France to join an order. Six or so months later she returned and said it did not work out. Several years later she left for South America for a different religious order and told me if I wrote to her to use invisible ink because the police would be watching her. Once again she returned and said it did not work out.
Several different families took her in for periods of time and once again, it did not work out. One person who took her in told me she expected to be waited on. More details are known about this problem, but let us let the dead rest in peace. For a couple of years she lived in a homeless shelter in Long Beach.
May she rest in peace. May Father Perez rest in peace. Let us pray.
Father Perez had complaints from chapel members about her constant begging before and after Mass. It is my understanding that he repeatedly asked her to stop doing so,, but she persisted. Eventually Father Perez instructed Father Starbuck to tell her to leave.
(This was his M.O., as when he told Father Starbuck to deal with the school board to find out why they refused to vet Wiest)
)
Debbie was attending the Indult at the San Juan Capistrano Mission when she passed away. If you continue to have questions, please contact Father John who says the Indult Mass there.
-
despite really liking Fr. Perez from his interviews it looks like he had terrible judgement.
Nearly every one of these lay-controlled independent chapels has gone down the same path to destruction after the original founding priest passed away.
-
Father Perez had complaints from chapel members about her constant begging before and after Mass. It is my understanding that he repeatedly asked her to stop doing so,, but she persisted. Eventually Father Perez instructed Father Starbuck to tell her to leave.
(This was his M.O., as when he told Father Starbuck to deal with the school board to find out why they refused to vet Wiest)
)
Debbie was attending the Indult at the San Juan Capistrano Mission when she passed away. If you continue to have questions, please contact Father John who says the Indult Mass there.
Okay, now this makes sense.
-
When a priest witnesses final vows - isn't that "making her a Carmelite'? If not, then what makes a Carmelite? What does 'final vows' mean to you? What Carmelite welcomed Debbie into the Carmelites? A Mother Superior of the Carmelites had to be there as well to witness this. Otherwise there is no order - anyone can be a Carmelite just by wishing - in your mind. Can't you see, can't you fathom, what chaos this would cause as ANYONE- worthy or not - could be a "Carmelite'.
Suppose I go over to your house & welcomed all the homeless in. Would they now have your name & be your responsibility? Can't you see what chaos this would cause? Are you really this dense or just stubborn to face facts?
You & only you can welcome people in. A Carmelite & only a Carmelite can welcome someone into the Order. Face REALITY, epiphany.
I'm done with you & your delusions. If you can't see this, then you're HOPELESS.
If I am walking and witness an accident, I was not the cause of the accident, I was not party to the accident, I just witnessed it. I saw it.
Fr. Sretenovic witnessed her final vows.
End of story.
-
Cutting all the emotionalism aside, are we to understand that people walked by this woman every Sunday and ignored her? Did she die on the sidewalk? Unless she was causing a disturbance why was she threatened with arrest? Why accept any guy who showed up claiming to be a priest and come down on this woman? More and more I'm convinced that these independent chapels are bad news and despite really liking Fr. Perez from his interviews it looks like he had terrible judgement.
She caused no disturbances.
Fr. Perez did not like her complaining to people about his decisions so Fr. Starbuck told her the police would be called if she entered OLHC property.
As for accepting any guy who showed up aiming to be a priest, Fr. Perez believed if he walks like a priest and talks like a priest then treat him as a priest until proven otherwise. It is the same judgement Tradition has. It is not what ABL taught.
Fr. Perez was a very good priest, as is Fr. Starbuck, but we all have our faults and mistakes. I hope Fr. Starbuck and all of OLHC now realize their mistake in not helping poor sister, God rest her soul.
-
Nearly every one of these lay-controlled independent chapels has gone down the same path to destruction after the original founding priest passed away.
I sure miss Fr. Schell, to this day.
-
If anyone should be hanging her head in shame, it is you Epiphany. You are the one engaging in calumny against a good and faithful priest.
Out of Christian charity I have refrained from speaking the facts. But as you and others have continued to attack a good and holy priest, I must speak out with the facts as personally told to me by Debbie.
Debbie, God rest her soul, was a laywoman for the first 60 years of her life, when she decided she wanted to be a nun and sewed a her own habit. She personally told me that she had a "high-power career in New York" and "shopped only at the most expensive department stores" and bought "only the most expensive designer suits".
She also told me she had two grown sons. Where were they and why did they not help out their aging mother?
Debbie was troubled,had mental and emotional problems, and repeatedly changed her name. I forget her other names prior to Sister Anastasia, but one was Sister Maria de Torres.
She left OLHC numerous times for greener pastures. Once I remember she told me she was going to France to join an order. Six or so months later she returned and said it did not work out. Several years later she left for South America for a different religious order and told me if I wrote to her to use invisible ink because the police would be watching her. Once again she returned and said it did not work out.
Several different families took her in for periods of time and once again, it did not work out. One person who took her in told me she expected to be waited on. More details are known about this problem, but let us let the dead rest in peace. For a couple of years she lived in a homeless shelter in Long Beach.
May she rest in peace. May Father Perez rest in peace. Let us pray.
Father Perez had complaints from chapel members about her constant begging before and after Mass. It is my understanding that he repeatedly asked her to stop doing so,, but she persisted. Eventually Father Perez instructed Father Starbuck to tell her to leave.
(This was his M.O., as when he told Father Starbuck to deal with the school board to find out why they refused to vet Wiest)
)
Debbie was attending the Indult at the San Juan Capistrano Mission when she passed away. If you continue to have questions, please contact Father John who says the Indult Mass there.
What you say sister told you is very different than what she and Fr. Perez told me.
Let us let the dead nun rest in peace.