Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Fighting Errors in the Modern World => Topic started by: s2srea on November 08, 2011, 12:30:36 PM
-
Does anyone know about this??
From FE
Pray for Monsignor Patrick J. Perez who was given the honor of Monsignor this past Sunday at Our Lady Help of Christians in Garden Grove, CA, by His Excellency Bishop Joseph Mar Thomas of the Eparchy of Bathery in India. He has been a true soldier of Christ since 1993, when he was ordained by Cardinal Stickler. He labored within the Institute of Christ the King until such time that they abandoned him. Without an assignment, he set up shop with Father Frderick Schell (who died in 2002), in Orange County, CA. He has labored in the wasteland of Mahoneyville and his buddy Bishop Brown, both haters of Catholic tradition, and have provided an oasis of Faith in this diocese, while the Bishop was busy shutting down Mases in other locals. Now the parish has four priests and over a thousand families. We ask the prayers for Monsignor that he may continue to be steadfast in his love of Christ and maintaining the traditions. Thank you.
Is +Mar Thomas the one who gives jurisdiction to Fr. Gruner? Whats the point of receiving a "Monsignor"ship in Traddie land??
-
To make yourself look more important than you are?
-
Was Fr. Perez validly ordained?
-
Was Fr. Perez validly ordained?
Fr. Perez was ordained by the late Alfons Maria Cardinal Stickler, who was a valid priest, but was "consecrated bishop" in the new (invalid rite) of anti-pope Paul VI.
If a priest has the fullness of the priesthood, than Fr. Perez is valid. If it takes a bishop to validly ordain, than Fr. Perez is not valid.
There is a posit that a priest has the fullness of the priesthood, but that an interdict has been placed on him. This means that a priest has the power, but not the permission to ordain other priests, and that the title of bishop is merely an office. I would really like more information regarding this. This topic seems to be shrouded in mystery.
-
Was Fr. Perez validly ordained?
Fr. Perez was ordained by the late Alfons Maria Cardinal Stickler, who was a valid priest, but was "consecrated bishop" in the new (invalid rite) of anti-pope Paul VI.
I forgot to add that Fr. Perez was ordained in the valid Latin Rite (not the new Paul VI rite) by "Cardinal" Stickler.
-
There is a posit that a priest has the fullness of the priesthood, but that an interdict has been placed on him. This means that a priest has the power, but not the permission to ordain other priests, and that the title of bishop is merely an office. I would really like more information regarding this. This topic seems to be shrouded in mystery.
This is not exactly correct and it is doubted by theologians whether a priest can, with a special papal indulgence, confer Major Ordinations.
There is not much mystery, just consult the approved theological manuals.
-
I've never liked FE but have gone on it a few times to check out what someone said was being discussed there. It's been a long, long time since I checked in on them.
When S2srea posted FE's glowing report on Fr. Patrick Perez I was surprised. I just now read Father's church bulletin and lo & behold! In the section of Events and right under Upcoming Events were Links and there was FE!!!!!! What traditional church would have a link to an internet site like that???! Traddyland is getting curiouser & curiouser. He also has little stories sometimes in the bulletin about a longboarder who gives surfing lessons. He even went to the beach to bless the kid's board before a contest. He didn't explain why the kid couldn't bring his beloved board to church to have Fr. bless it. Other odd things go on there.
So when S2srea posted that Fr. had managed to become a Monsignor, I wasn't surprised. Father is a young, brash, worldly man who missed his calling as a stand-up comic. I told friends & family several years ago that he'd finagle his way to become a bishop. His nickname is 'the pope' since he's got his own little universe. Mark my word - in another 10 years, or maybe less, he'll be a bishop.
-
Was Fr. Perez validly ordained?
Fr. Perez was ordained by the late Alfons Maria Cardinal Stickler, who was a valid priest, but was "consecrated bishop" in the new (invalid rite) of anti-pope Paul VI.
I wonder if Fr. Perez has ever been conditionally ordained by a Traditional Catholic bishop. Does anyone here know?
-
Was Fr. Perez validly ordained?
Fr. Perez was ordained by the late Alfons Maria Cardinal Stickler, who was a valid priest, but was "consecrated bishop" in the new (invalid rite) of anti-pope Paul VI.
I wonder if Fr. Perez has ever been conditionally ordained by a Traditional Catholic bishop. Does anyone here know?
As far as I know, no.
My sister goes to his chapel. I've been slowly trying for a few months to convince her to go to another chapel, with little luck. There's a 'devotion' issue I think, as he'd married het and her husband, and baptized their firstborn. So when I heard her call him Msgr. I was a bit puzzled. So I googled him, and of course FE came up； I'm no contributor there, but expected some of his parishoners to be, and rightly so.
-
Before your sister was married did Perez announce or post the banns of marriage? I have a reason for this question.
-
I seriously doubt that he was conditionally ordained. He keeps his background a little murky. If he had been conditionally ordained, knowing him, he'd have proudly announced it; but as I stated he doesn't give out too much info on his background.
-
Before your sister was married did Perez announce or post the banns of marriage? I have a reason for this question.
Honestly, I don't know, as I don't attend his chapel.
You're right about him not being completely open. My own priest worked with him for a time, but decided to leave. I'm not sure why, as he won't tell me specifics, but I know a big difference between my priest and the priests at OLHC is that they're not conditionally ordained, and all have some sort of connection to the new 'rite' in their ordinations. I assume this is why my priest left, but am not certain. Sometimes when he's (Perez) is brought up, I ask my priest about his time there, but he just tells me that he 'prefers not to talk about it, if thats okay'. I know he's trying to avoid scandal. And as inquisitive as I want to be, how can I argue with that lol.
-
Before your sister was married did Perez announce or post the banns of marriage? I have a reason for this question.
Oh, btw, whats the reason :detective:
-
Because the only banns that are announced or posted are for the favored ones, that is, those with money or the ones in power. Many, many marriages have been performed there without banns announced. Very few ordinary ones get posted or announced. I always thought the banns were a requirement. Aren't they? Not in Perezlandia it seems.
Your priest didn't leave, he was told to leave because he joined or went over to the Old Catholics; least that's what Perez told his sheeple from the pulpit.
btw, doesn't that huge picture of Divine Mercy bother you?
-
Because the only banns that are announced or posted are for the favored ones, that is, those with money or the ones in power. Many, many marriages have been performed there without banns announced. Very few ordinary ones get posted or announced. I always thought the banns were a requirement. Aren't they? Not in Perezlandia it seems.
Well I know they're supposed to be done, but I doubt they affect validity.
Your priest didn't leave, he was told to leave because he joined or went over to the Old Catholics; least that's what Perez told his sheeple from the pulpit.
And that's why I love my priest. Because no matter how much he'd been calumniated and slandered against, he doesn't return the favor. That's a flat out lie; unless you think I sound like an Old Catholic too :wink: .
btw, doesn't that huge picture of Divine Mercy bother you?
Yep.
BTW- do you mind me asking where you go to mass? Do we know each other? PM if u like.
-
Interesting! I don't know if it's true about him going to the Old Catholics. That's just what was said from the pulpit, in his best authoritarian voice.
I go to Mass here, there & everywhere. I'm quite certain we don't know each other & have never met.
-
I've been wondering if I should be posting on Fr. Perez. Normally I wouldn't think of disrespecting a priest. But these are not normal times and the NO partly came into full bloom because Joe Blow in the pew just sat there & let it happen. Yes, the NO came from high places & maybe no matter what Joe Blow said or did, it would have been imposed on us; but still I believe that all the Joe Blows should have had a spine and refused to go along. We are called to be Soldiers of Christ & no matter the outcome we MUST fight evil and not just passively sit there & let things go on. That is why I think Joe Blow has a duty to expose false prophets & false contortions of the true Mass. Those of us in the trenches may get a little dirty, but should we just sit comfortably in the pew and just pray? I think not.
There are many problems with Fr. Perez. Some even wonder about his validity. I won't go there since I'm not equipped to tell but I do know 'by their fruits.....'.
I'm not the only one to leave his kingdom. The sad part is that many others have also - but to join non-Catholic chuches or to become home-aloners & even sadder to give up entirely. Yes, some drive greater distances to go to a SSPX or CMRI. Going to Fr. with a concern is tricky. To put it kindly- he needs to go to anger management classes. He's crucified people from the pulpit who have dared speak up, he's threatened and expelled others.
However it's his treatment of the Mass & ecclesiastical things that bothers me the most. Yes, as has been reported, he does the Mass perfectly. But you can't help but note how robotically he moves. Any actor can do the Mass. He takes in stray NO priests that have only had a few years of training in theology and teaches them how to say the Mass. There's more to being a priest than saying the TLM. An actor or even a Mason can do that. One priest that he taught said his first Mass so badly that some of us cringed. To make matters worse he laughed & made light of his mistakes when he gave his sermon. I can say much more about these priests but let's move on to the final straw.
Father didn't have enough priests to put on a Really Big Show for an important Mass. What did he do? He simply picked a young man from the flock, dressed him in priestly vestments, called him a straw sub-deacon & on with the show!!!! Shouldn't the people have protested this or at least questioned it? No, because he's got other people there who aren't quite what they seem and apparently the flock has been nicely conditioned to accept anything he says or does. Or maybe they're too afraid.
-
Straw subdeacons are not unheard of , but if one is going to be used, and really they shouldn't, he should be in subdeacon's vestments, not priest's vestments.
-
What, pray tell, is a straw sub-deacon? Falsity has no place at the true Mass. Either a man is a deacon or he is not, so what difference does it make what he wears??
Where have you heard about a straw sub-deacon? In the NO? I've never in my life heard of one till this incident. The straw sub-deacon was a complete layman in priest's vestments that matched the other priest's vestments who acted as a deacon (or maybe he acted as a sub-deacon too).
I really do want to know where you ever heard of straw sub-deacons.
-
It is certainly not NO. They don't have subdeacons anymore.
I am actually a little embarrassed. It occurred to me after I posted the above statement that I heard about this from an Anglican. High church Anglicans will sometimes dress a server in subdeacon's vestments. They do not and never have had people they call subdeacons, but want to make their services look like a Solemn High Mass. I have no idea if Catholics have ever done anything like that. I certainly hope not.
So, basically, never mind.
-
How many people go to the Vietnamese catechism classes at OLHC?
-
Straw subdeacons are not unheard of , but if one is going to be used, and really they shouldn't, he should be in subdeacon's vestments, not priest's vestments.
A subdeacon is a step in Holy Orders. No one can be a subdeacon if he has not reached that step while moving up to the priesthood.
-
That is absolutely correct. See my post above where I explain that I was mistaken.
-
Vladimir, why do you ask?
-
I think Vlad is really close to the Vietnamese culture (or is Vietnamese), if I"m not mistaken.
Vlad- if you make it out to SoCal- let me know we'll go eat some Pho'! I know all the excellent restaurants!! I even had a close friend who was a chef at one!
-
I saw the announcement on OLHC website and it aroused my curiosity. I want to know more about the extent to which traditional Catholicism has entered the Vietnamese community. I'm also curious how the classes work and what materials (if any) they are using. To my knowledge, the only semi-traditional Vietnamese catechism widely available is a reprint of a translation of the Katholichser Katechismus. However, to my horror, when I skimmed through the book there is evidence that this reprint was done after Vatican II, as there is reference to the Mass no longer being said in Latin, but in the vernacular. There is no other indicators of unorthodoxy though, and on the whole it is a good catechism.
The other traditional catechism that I know of is an 8 part series of sermons by Alexandre de Rhodes covering the basics of the faith. His Vietnamese was extremely good and his rhetoric/style is very moving, however this edition is in archaic language and not widely available to my knowledge in printed form. It's also aimed at new converts and pagans.
Both these catechisms are fairly basic however, and I don't see how they could truly profit an adult class, the members of which probably already are familiar with the basics of the faith. Even among the Vatican II faithful, they have retained the majority of the true faith, thanks largely in part to the reprinting of pre-Vatican II material, such as old prayer books and spiritual writing. They have not entirely lost a "Catholic sense", like many Americans.
The other option, which would be even more exciting for me, is that they run a sort of introduction to Tradition catechism class for Catholics new to tradition. To my knowledge, there are no traditional Catholic apologetics books available in Vietnamese (i.e., Open Letter to Confused Catholics, etc). There may have been translations from French, but of that I'm not sure. I'd be very interested in the vocabulary and rhetoric they use to defend tradition. I would think that it is heavily laden with Sino-Vietnamese vocabulary (the equivalent of a heavily Latinate vocabulary in English) and difficult for the layperson to understand.
s2srea - Nothing like a bowl of pho on a cold morning. :smirk:
-
Sorry, Vladimir, that I can't answer your question, but I'm guessing that perhaps a Vietnamese layman leads the class using the same book that Fr. Perez uses for the English class and translates for the class. I'm quite certain that they would NOT use any Vatican II books. Not all catechism classes there are lead by priests so using a layman wouldn't be out of the ordinary there.
-
As to straw-subdeacons, the Catholic Church permits clerics(tonsure and above) to serve as a substitute when ordained subdeacons are not available. They do not wear the maniple.
When John XXIII took over the Vatican, he permitted laymen(non-clerics, or not even a seminarian) to take over the role of subdeacon in a Solemn High Mass. So, if your place accepts John XXIII as pope, then there is a certain logic for them to use a layman for a subsititute subdeacon/straw-subdeacon.
I hope this helps.
-
And dresses him in priest's vestments to match the other priest?! Isn't this putting on a false front? I've been to very, very few NO Masses so I'm not up on what they do. If this priest was following the strict traditional Mass, then why would he allow such a thing? (except for show), which to me seems a flimsy reason. But, yes, I will allow that your explanation could explain such a thing. So then the question is: If this priest is doing so many NO things, why isn't he under a bishop? Never mind, I think I know the answer.
-
I have no idea if Catholics have ever done anything like that. I certainly hope not.
Once a man is a cleric (i.e. receives tonsure) he can act as a "straw subdeacon" at Solemn Mass. He doesn't wear the maniple (IIRC) or the stole.
It is perfectly normal and traditional.
-
And dresses him in priest's vestments to match the other priest?!
No he wears the tunicle (which looks basically the same as the dalmatic). Only the celebrating priest at a Solemn Mass wears the chasuble. Priests acting as deacon wear the dalmatic, priests or deacons acting as subdeacon the tunicle.
It's not an "NO" thing at all.
-
Pepsuber, please, did you read the original post?! We're not talking about CLERICS acting as straw subdeacons! We're talking of a complete 19 or 20 year old LAYMAN here! We're also not talking wearing tunicles, but priest's vestments that match exactly the other priest's vestments to make it look pretty. In other words - putting on a false front for appearences at a TLM!!! The True Mass.
-
We're also not talking wearing tunicles, but priest's vestments that match exactly the other priest's vestments to make it look pretty. In other words - putting on a false front for appearences at a TLM!!! The True Mass.
That sounds really weird. Who would be fooled by seeing multiple ministers in chasubles?
-
Pepsuber, what are you talking about??
-
No, the straw subdeacon did not wear a tunicle - he wore exactly what the other priest, (acting as a subdeacon),wore!!
What exactly 'sounds really weird'?! and why?
What do you mean 'who would be fooled by muliple ministers in chasubles'??
-
No, the straw subdeacon did not wear a tunicle - he wore exactly what the other priest, (acting as a subdeacon),wore!!
Do you mean what the priest acting as deacon wore? That's the dalmatic. The tunicle often looks exactly like the dalmatic. So that is what the straw subdeacon ought to wear.
What exactly 'sounds really weird'?! and why?
I thought your reference to priestly vestments was a reference to the chasuble. The dalmatic is the diaconal vestment, the tunicle the subdiaconal vestment. The latter often looks just like the former.
What do you mean 'who would be fooled by muliple ministers in chasubles'??
The only reason for multiple ministers in chasubles is concelebration, which is very rare in the traditional rite.
-
Pepsuber, with all due respect, though I wasn't there to witness what Thorn is speaking about, I think his concern is that a layman was assisting at mass as priest/ deacon.
This is his issue.
I don't think he would care if the person dressing in the actual tunicles/chasubles were a priest/deacon, but the fact that a layman is assisting at the mass wearing the priests vestments (regardless of tunicles/ chasubles) for the sake of aesthetics.
-
I don't think he would care if the person dressing in the actual tunicles/chasubles were a priest/deacon, but the fact that a layman is assisting at the mass wearing the priests vestments (regardless of tunicles/ chasubles) for the sake of aesthetics.
A "straw" subdeacon is exactly that, a layman. It's not a untraditional or Novus ordo practice at all. It's not ideal, of course, but I think having Solemn Mass with a straw subdeacon is preferable (and not just aesthetically -- Solemn Mass is the norm) to having a Missa Cantata or (worse yet) Low Mass. As far as the young man Fr. Perez had acting as subdeacon, he could have been a former seminarian who had been tonsured or an installed acolyte or something like that.
-
Fair enough good man! I wasn't sure if it was clear what was being said :wink:
And I don't know much about strict liturgical practices anyhow lol
-
Thanks, s2srea, for the clarification, altho I thought what I posted was abundantly clear to begin with. What you wrote hit the nail on the head.
Pepsuber, please, I beg of you, give it up. You completely misunderstood the postings & have taken off on unnecessary explanations on tunicles, dalmatics & stuff that has nothing to do with the subject. Are you baiting me? Trying to show off your liturgical knowledge? Or simply posting anything for the sheer fun of it? I refuse to deal with you after I once more go thro the drill. This is Xmas & I refuse to rebut you & get in a round & round-we-go discussion.
1. Are you NO? All your explanations & words sound like you do not have a traditional bone in your body. This is not to fault you, but to see truth.
2. Forget tunicles & dalmatics, as well as multiple ministers & concelebration. They have absolutely nothing to do with this.
3. The young man was NOT a former or present seminarian. He was nothing of what you state he could be. Pure & simple - he's a young layman. So stop already with your suppostions & face the truth. He wore a chasuble that matched the other priest's (who acted as deacon or subdeacon) & the Mass wasn't concelebrated. It was a TLM.
4. Straw subdeacons are not untraditional or NO??!! So you're saying they're traditional?!! You show me proof that they're traditional & this has been practiced for thousands or hundreds of years & I'll eat my hat & send you the picture as proof.
5. HAVING A PHONEY (you do know what straw means, don't you?) SUBDEACON TO EXECUTE A SOLEMN HIGH MASS IS PREFERABLE TO A TRUE, BEAUTIFULLY SIMPLE LOW MASS??!! Surely you don't mean that. Then to say - '(worse yet) Low Mass.' is too much for me. Something is very wrong with your postings, and as I said, I refuse to debate this any further with you. There's much too many really wrong things going on in that church to start making things up like what you're doing.
-
I'm sorry, I stand corrected. I checked the pictures again, & indeed the priest who is acting as a deacon or subdeacon, and the young layman are both wearing either tunicles or dalmatics. Whatever - that is not the point. My quarrel is the fact that the young man is in any kind of vestments (other than what an altar boy would wear).
If this is going on, are there others in that church wearing things portraying themselves to be something that they are not?
-
Thorn, I was not trying to goad you. I was trying to get at the heart of the matter. Sometimes people get upset because of perceived wrongs which turn out, upon further investigation, not to be wrongs at all. Here is a blurb about a straw subdeacon from 1945:
http://arc.stparchive.com/Archive/ARC/ARC04131945p03.php
At Little Rock, Marty Busby donned a tunic Easter Sunday assuming the office of straw subdeacon at the Solemn High Mass at Good Counsel, his parish church
I don't think the practice goes back thousands or even hundreds of years as the prevailing theology of the Middle Ages was that the subdiaconate was a major Order (cf. the Council of Florence, Decree for the Armenians).
Since Solemn Mass is the ideal, yes, having Solemn Mass with a straw subdeacon is preferable to a Missa Cantata, which is preferable to a Low Mass. Solemn Mass is the norm, everything else is an accommodation. In the case of the Solemn Mass with a straw subdeacon, there is less accommodation than there is in a Missa Cantata or in a Low Mass. The Low Mass only became popular because of the Reformation and subsequent persecution in non-Catholic countries.
-
Pepsuber, are you a friend of Fr. Perez, or do you go to his church? Did you confer with him to finally find that blurb in an obscure paper to 'prove' his point? You do know, don't you, that the 40's weren't the Golden Age of Catholicism - especially in America? So in your mind & his, finding a single instance of a case of using a straw subdeacon in 1945 justifies him. Then I guess that the annulment of Sheila Kennedy's marriage would justify annulments now. Is that how you & he thinks? You didn't get to the heart of the matter, you merely said, 'see, he did it in 1945, so I can do it again, now.' I know of another priest in the early 1500's who also thought he could do things better & do things his way, and finally went off and started his own church that now bears his name. I'm telling you, Fr. Perez is going down a very wide, dangerous path. He's also ever so subtlely leading the sheeple to accept untraditional practices, all for show.
-
Pepsuber, are you a friend of Fr. Perez, or do you go to his church?
I've never met the man and probably would not assist at his Mass if the opportunity presented itself. I find the whole business with his new title exceedingly strange.
Then I guess that the annulment of Sheila Kennedy's marriage would justify annulments now.
Her appeal was upheld by the Rota -- the annulment was "reversed."
-
Pepsuber, are you a friend of Fr. Perez, or do you go to his church?
I've never met the man and probably would not assist at his Mass if the opportunity presented itself. I find the whole business with his new title exceedingly strange.
Agreed. I'm still scratching my head, and wanting to hit my sister over the head with a pan because she's follows him all too easily.
-
Pepsuber - You have a problem with his new title which he did get from the pope through a Bishop that he met in India, but have no problem with him using a 19-20 year old straw subdeacon??!!! Can you explain?
s2srea - If your sister knew what I knew you wouldn't need to hit her over the head! I don't know if some things are still on the 'net, but try Googling him for some eye-opening stuff for a trad priest to be interested in. No, nothing sinful really, at least for a layman, but rather A LOT of worldly interests for a trad priest. Not to speak of the utter waste of time & money.
-
WARNING - Do not click on the website 'Fr. Patrick J Perez' as there's a warning that it has dangerous downloads (or something like that) I can't find all the things I found before when I Googled. They're either too far back or have been removed.
-
Pepsuber - You have a problem with his new title which he did get from the pope through a Bishop that he met in India, but have no problem with him using a 19-20 year old straw subdeacon??!!! Can you explain?
In each case it's the lack of information that's the key. I don't want to condemn Fr. Perez over the straw subdeacon because I don't know the circuмstances. On the other hand, the new title raises a host of questions. I've never heard of a bishop requesting the title for a priest not of his own diocese, let alone a priest not of his own ritual church. It's not knowing the circuмstances in this case that makes it disturbing.
-
Pepsuber - You have a problem with his new title which he did get from the pope through a Bishop that he met in India, but have no problem with him using a 19-20 year old straw subdeacon??!!! Can you explain?
In each case it's the lack of information that's the key. I don't want to condemn Fr. Perez over the straw subdeacon because I don't know the circuмstances. On the other hand, the new title raises a host of questions. I've never heard of a bishop requesting the title for a priest not of his own diocese, let alone a priest not of his own ritual church. It's not knowing the circuмstances in this case that makes it disturbing.
Perhaps we could ask "Monsignor" Wach of the ICK to settle the question for us? :facepalm:
-
Thorn, would the type of interests referred to include this from the educate-yourself website?
Subject: Re: New Photos of Black Beams in SoCal.
From: "pp918" redacted
Date: Sat, May 19, 2007
To: Editor
Dear Ken,
Here they are. I have reduced the size of the files for easier emailing, but should you or anyone else want the larger pixel images to blow them up better or play around with them (as in enhance them as was done to some of the other photos on your site, to make the beams more distinct... I don't have the programs for doing all that myself), I can email them one at a time or send them on a cd.
As for my parishioners being informed about all this, yes they are up to speed on chemtrails, the irs, the fed, all that and more. We are a traditional Catholic parish, one that has kept the old Latin Mass the way it was before and so are used to having to fight the system on virtually everything, so the people here are kind of different and into all that stuff, you might say. In any case, they're no strangers to chemtrails for the most part. There may be some of the little old ladies we don't want to bother with the gory details, you realize, but in general, they've got the picture.
Once again, thank you for all your hard work to inform the public.
God bless!
Fr.Patrick J. Perez
-
Yes, Talavera, that's one! Can you imagine how those 'little old ladies' would feel if they only knew how condescending he speaks of them? And it's those 'little old ladies' that put some big bucks into that church.
That website is quite New Age & into some mighty strange stuff.
-
You're right about that. They would have a fit if they knew. Wonder how Msgr. Perez justifies leading his congregation in those directions. :heretic: That site borders on paranoia in places.
-
He really doesn't lead his congregation into that stuff. He has his inner circle that he talks to & socializes with & the rest he basically ignores, except for his puerile sermons on History splattered with one-liners that he giggles at.
That site is worse than just paranoid. It's into witchcraft, the occult, & some far-out stuff.
-
Sorry, but I see that some websites that he's posted on are hard to find now, so let me give you a few. They all have reviews that he's written.
1. Red Cloud Cigar Martini Bar & Billiards in Fullerton. This is now closed & I can't bring up his glowing review of the place. His was one of 7 reviews & written 12/30/04. His title for it is, 'What a rare & great place!' In part he writes '... comfortable & the people working there were friendly & helpful. I enjoyed the evening. It is a great place to meet cigar-smoking ........' By Fr. Patrick Perez from Garden Grove. I didn't print this out till 2010 so this was all that was posted then. Sorry I didn't print it out when I first found it in its entirety.
2. BlanketWorx.com Click on Testimonials on the right & go to the bottom of p. 17. He wrote this 9/4/08. Gushy, gushy.
3. Ringingcedarsofrussia.org Go to Store & scroll past the books to click on Spoons on the right. Then click on Comments. He wrote this 9/21/07. They are $11.50 for 2. He also ordered a bag of shelled cedar nuts & a cedar wood pendant.(!!!) Since the nuts are no longer in stock you can't see the review but he says, 'These are the best I have ever tasted. Whatever about their "cosmic energy". I have never had any sweeter or tastier than these (Is that what "cosmic energy" does to them?' The nuts are $24.95 for 17.6 oz.
4. Google 'Absinthe the Sip of Seduction'. They used to show a few pages of the book & one of those pages had the Acknowledgments & there, in alphabetical order, is Fr. Patrick J. Perez. I don't think they show that page any more but some libraries carry the book. I understand that he did the translation for the Absinthe Museum.
All these things are his own words that he proudly put on the 'net for all to see. He also did a review for a Trinidad cigar company but I can't find it now. I'm quite sure that there are many, many more reviews 'out there', but this should give you a taste of the man in his own words. I guess the moral of this is if you go to that church you better put in big bucks cuz this man has expensive tastes.
-
Something strange is happening. Right after I posted, I Googled Absinthe & the book came up & I clicked on 'See inside this book' & it showed Perez's name as the translator for the Foreword by Marie-Claude Delahaye. I thought this must be the 2nd ed. as his name wasn't there in the first one (only in the Acknowledgments). An hour or so later I thought I'd post to tell you this, checked again, & now his name is gone!!!!!! I've tried several times & no luck. What's on the 'net now is the Revised Ed. If you can't find his name you can get the book in the library.
Anyway, a shame that a trad priest has to moonlight by translating for a book on hallucinogenic drinks.
-
Y'know, "Msgr" Perez has a lot of time on his hands. Don't think it is beneath him to follow this thread (he probably has been informed about it) and make 'edits' to various things that are brought up, deleting old reviews, emailing old friends to remove his name from acknowledgments in books about odd, hallucinogenic interests, etc.
If you're going to note something here, be sure to screen capture *at least* before you post it.
-
Indeed he does have lots of time on his hands!! He whines & complains from the pulpit if he has to go a distance to say Mass & actually stopped going that distance. Too much time away from the beloved computer I guess. I've only given a few things to show the caliber of the man. I have also noted that there have been over 2700 views of this thread & only a few people have dared post. Someone's watching! btw I've been warned by someone I met only once a couple of years ago after I left his church to be careful, that I'm dealing with a hornet's nest. This person was not smiling & wouldn't explain. You're quite right about screen capturing things, I see.
-
Please be aware that when some people who spoke out against Fr. Paul Sretenovic (Fr. Perez's assistant priests) on some Internet blog, Fr. Sretenovic was informed by his parishioners which led him to write counter those bloggers with his argument.
I think writing things about Fr. Perez could escalate to a public condemnation from the pulpit in my opinion. I mean if he could do it to his former assistant priest (who was consecrated a bishop in secret by Thuc-line bishops) then likewise Fr. Perez could do it again to the one who started this thread. And mind you, he also spoke out against his assistant priest on The Remnant Newspaper.
-
I'm fully aware of that. (not the condemnation in the Remnant, however. What issue was that?) He's already threatened that. That's why he's been dubbed the 'pope'. He's got the bully pulpit & everyone knows it & dares not speak. I'm sick to death of cowardly Catholics.
St. Joan of Arc, please remember us!
-
I didn't know Fr. Perez was categorized as, in my own paraphrased understanding, a slanderer by the Remnant Newspaper or some traditional Catholic periodical?
I find his political stances as a traditional Catholic to be contradicting..
He follows the pre-1955 rubrics which for me a schismatic behavior because the Roman Pontiff has the authority to modify rubrics in the Church since rubrics are malleable according to Bishop Louis Morrow, a missionary prelate with a theology doctorate and contemporary of Pope Pius XII. And the twist is, he follows the mandate of Pope John XXIII in allowing laymen to act as straw-deacon in a Solemn High Mass. That's using a pre-1955 Liturgy with a tweak of a 1960 reform? When I was in the Seminary, all our liturgical books were 1955. It would be unheard of to use the 1965 rubrics and say, let's say the Epistle and Gospel in English because Rome said it's okay while using the 1955 Liturgy!
His congregation (a majority of them) are SSPX supporters yet many of them don't realize that the SSPX doesn't recognize the 1971 New Rite of Confirmation as valid. I mention this because some of his parishioners disparaged me for condemning the New Rite of Confirmation and for me saying they have to be conditionally confirmed. One of them condemned it as sedevacantist agenda.
I was like, "When I went to the SSPX as a kid, I had to read Archbishop Lefebvre's book, 'An Open Letter to Confused Catholics' where he says the New Rite of Confirmation is invalid and many Novus Ordo priests may not be real priests because of a defect of intention by the Vatican II bishops". Mind you, the people that disparaged me from Fr. Perez's chapel are SSPX supporters. They support an organization that they don't even know about or let alone what it believes.
Their logical reasoning is almost like me saying, "I support Planned Parenthood but I don't know they carry out abortions. You can't tell me they do abortions because that's so extreme to accept".
He disparages this Catholic priest for being consecrated a traditional bishop by a Thuc-line prelate in the East Coast. He says it wasn't necessary, in the Remnant Newspaper, since the SSPX episcopal consecrations were justifiable. Does Fr. Perez realize that Archbishop Lefebvre didn't want his flock to be left without true sacraments? I remembered his public sermon before the 1988 episcopal ordinations, Msgr. Lefebvre said, "Shall the faithful rely on doubtful sacraments" as result of doubtful intentions from Novus Ordo bishops.
In regards to the former priest that worked with him (who is now a traditional bishop), that bishop didn't go to Old Catholics. He turned to a Roman Catholic bishop upon the advice of Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy, a SSPX seminary professor and sedevacantist teacher to Fr. Anthony Cekada and Bishop Daniel Dolan. And so I rest my case... if it's okay for Fr. Cekada's seminary professor then likewise it's okay for me.
-
btw I've been warned by someone I met only once a couple of years ago after I left his church to be careful, that I'm dealing with a hornet's nest. This person was not smiling & wouldn't explain.
I find this part funny. I myself wouldn't go quite that far. I mean, what on earth is he going to do? Denounce us from his pulpit? Ummm, ok. It's his pulpit.
Am I worried about Our Lady Help of Christians (their parish) NKVD operatives performing a rendition of me into a dark room with a solitary, bare, dangling lightbulb to 'catechize' me with some jumper cables and a rubber hose? C'mon.
He's just a blowhard. He might bloviate me to death, but I withstood his oral Santa Ana winds during his 'homilies' enough before, that I'm not terribly worried.
He is rage-prone, and a control freak, so I wouldn't doubt he'd fulminate and fantasize about having such resources to dispatch, but he doesn't. He probably has a few flying monkeys (wizard of Oz reference) that fancy themselves Trad Black Ops that would practically beg him to assign them to some sort of surveillance, but if I see vans parked too long outside my house I'd be more inclined to offer some cocoa (with the big traditional marshmallows, not the miniature post-conciliar ones) than lose a wink of sleep
I'm sure the person that spoke ominously (and vaguely) was either enjoying the air of tradecraft that goes with ominous, vague warnings, or just referring to the few odd ducks over there that obsess over conspiracy theories (all novel and recent inventions you'd think a traditionalist would be averse to) and think there's actually spies in the pews some weeks. Such people could be (and are!) loose cannons, and can do odd things to wouldbe critics possibly, but again, a terrified loner in a fringe community is nothing to worry about.
I'm not making fun of conspirology, don't get me wrong, I think it is blatant that masonic operatives attacked and continue to attack the Faith and the liturgy. But I do disagree with those who, though well intentioned, slide down the slippery slope of thinking that one, or two, or even three cօռspιʀαcιҽs necessitates belief in nearly every other conspiracy-- 'the paranoid worldview,' which is a form of despair and a trap set by the Enemy...but I digress..
One of my gravest suspicions of "Msgr" Perez is that he foments all this other extra-Catholic paranoia *from the pulpit* (ostensibly speaking with authority!)
-
RonCal - I don't understand the first sentence of your 4:03 post. I don't read the Remnant so I don't know what he wrote. What issue was it? And please 'splain that first sentence.
Iuvenalis - I never once thought about dark rooms with rubber hose and all, so I don't know what all that's about. I do know that he can make life miserable for you in other more subtle ways. The person that warned me I'm quite sure had no thought of cօռspιʀαcιҽs & neither did I. Just dealing with Perez can be torture enough. He can foment stuff not only from the pulpit, but simply by being the authority there & talking 'off the cuff'. I'm not overly worried either but I am guarded ( No, I'm not worried that someone, or even he, will show up at my door & do whatever they do when they show up at your door). I do think that SOMEONE needs to speak up & warn people about him. He has no bishop so who do you go to when you see something wrong? He's the pope.
I also disagree that most at that chapel are SPPX supporters. In the past that probably was true. Some are, but by now most of the people there are ex-NO that have no clue about tradition & that's why they accept him & his nonsense.
-
Thorn, for some reason, I cant find the reference to the Remnant article where Fr Perez attacks +Fama and sedevecantism (even though +Fama isn't a sede, though is sede friendly).
-
I still want to see the Remnant article & will search myself, too. I didn't know exactly what the subject was, but I've already read & heard a speech on youtube of his on sedevacantism given several years ago which I felt was VERY weak & I can't imagine anyone who knows anything being convinced by it. I've never read or heard any attacks on Fr. Fama except that one from the pulpit.
-
To find the Fr. Perez article on Google, type in "Most Holy Family Monastery" and "Father Patrick Perez" together and a link should come out describing the "apostasy" of Fr. Perez and Dr. Thomas Droleskey.
Another article is by Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy... type in "Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy" together with "Father Fama" an article written by Dr. Rama should come out where he criticizes Fr. Perez and the Remnant Newspaper's calumnious article against a traditional bishop.
-
Thanks for the links RonCal. What MHFM wrote is basically what Perez said from the pulpit about Fr. Fama. The strange thing is that religious come & go at OLHC all the time with nothing said, so why the long explanation from the pulpit for Fr. Fama when he left? Just a rhetorical question - not much makes sense there.
-
Father Perez can disparage a traditional priest for receiving episcopal ordination and say that such an action was not justifiable yet he is not mindful that he himself is a suspended priest under the Conciliar Church.
I read a letter sent by Institute of Christ the King to a diocesan priest for the Diocese of Orange which stated that Fr. Perez was suspended from exercising his ministry. Although he was suspended for unjust reasons nevertheless Canon Law forbids him from acting as a priest.
I remembered Padre Pio being censured by the Vatican from hearing confessions and offering public Masses. And Padre Pio never bypassed the sentence by exercising his ministry as an independent priest! So clearly, Fr. Perez's ministry violates John Paul II's Canon Law, but one may wonder if his suspension was removed since he was appointed monsignor.
-
I never read or heard that he was suspended by ICK. I did read from ICK to a layman that Perez simply left them. The Diocese has put out warnings about Perez - perhaps it's the Diocese that says he's suspended? I know they made it clear that he is not authorized to offer Mass. You should have read the ridiculous letter one of the other priests at OLHC wrote to the priest whose bulletin he had seen that carried the announcement! As if the priest had anything to do with it! It was in ALL the Diocese's church bulletins.
As I said - Perez's past is a bit cloudy.
-
In regards to Fr. Perez's past... he was ordained in 1993 by Cardinal Alfons Maria Stickler, the retired Vatican archivist and former member of Vatican II's Consilium, the ecclesiastical body that created the New Mass and the New Sacraments.
Cardinal Stickler was a traditional Catholic, he supported the SSPX and recognized the New Sacraments to be defective. In fact, when he confirmed my friend in the pre-1971 Rite, Cardinal Stickler blessed the chrism oil using the traditional Roman rite and not the New Rite discreetly implying his disdain for the Paul VI's reforms.
Though Cardinal Stickler had the True Faith, the pious prelate was consecrated in the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration by Pope John Paul II. As a result, many traditional Catholics with strict views on validity, don't recognize Fr. Perez as a real priest.
Dr. Thomas Droleskey, once a loyal supporter of Fr. Perez, became a sedevacantist recently and no longer regards the latter a true priest.
-
I started lurking on this forum when I read about SGG through Dr. Droleskey. I saw so many problems with Perez (another longstanding problem that I haven't touched on here, finally caused me to walk.) I felt so alone as most of the people there put up with him, or worse, - never even saw a problem. Misery loves company you know! As I've stated I wasn't the only one to leave in disgust, but I wasn't really friends with them - I just knew them or knew of them.
Anyway, after reading about SGG, CMRI, SSPV & experiencing OLHC, I'm beginning to agree more & more with those with a 'strict view on validity'. I also disagree with the poster here (Can't remember who) who writes about 'sentimental fiftyism'. My parents & all those I grew up with in the 50's were far from sentimental. They were down to earth, salt of the earth kind of people who were no-nonsense Catholics. They'd feel right at home with St. Peter I do believe, so I don't know what he's talking about. The ONE true church has been fractured into a thousand warring groups, so now we see Catholics fighting Catholics instead of the outside enemy - all the while going to church praying for UNITY! And no, I don't have the answer.
To get back to Perez - I was mainly referring to the different seminaries he was in & also the churches he pastored in Europe & why he left them all, or was he asked to leave? He seems to be mum on all that. I know about his ordination by Cardinal Stickler, but how & when did he meet the author of Absinthe??
-
I'm beginning to agree more & more with those with a 'strict view on validity'. I also disagree with the poster here (Can't remember who) who writes about 'sentimental fiftyism'. .
I agree with you Thorn, because without validity we have no true union with Our Lord if the sacraments are invalid. Imagine going to confession to an invalidly ordained Novus Ordo priest in order to get absolved from yours sins. Then once you leave the confessional booth, you still keep your favorite sins with you! (I meant the last sentence as a joke and with no bad intention)
Sadly, many of Fr. Perez's parishioners fall under the same category as Novus Ordo Catholics and Indult Catholics because they do not believe in validity. My friends noticed this peculiar behavior from one of Our Lady Help Christians' young men, who deck themselves in dated attire and spoke archaic language, e.g. calling blacks "negroes" or calling Northerners "Yanks". Some of these individuals openly disparage racial intermarriage and multiculturalism yet watch Japanese anime or drive foreign cars! And yes, I personally witnessed that myself.
I remembered growing up in the SSPX and CMRI, we never dressed in dated attire or used archaic language. We never disparaged racial intermarriage or multiculturalism because it was never an issue for us. We had Lebanese married to Mexicans. Whites married to Filipinos or whites married to Koreans. We had French Canadians married to Anglo-Saxons. The diversity of our parish made us happy because we could relate to another by discussing the True Faith.
In regards to dated attire: our SSPX pastor exhorted us to wear our Sunday's best for Sunday Mass. He said on weekdays, men can wear blue jeans or shorts while women were always expected to wear a skirt or dress for the sake of Marian modesty.
When I moved to the CMRI (after becoming a sedevacantist), our priests exhorted us to be patriotic to our country. The SSPX never discussed much about American culture because many of them were European-minded Catholics. Our CMRI priests, especially Bishop Mark Pivarunas, wanted to instill in the minds of their parishioners to be good American Catholics. The color of one's skin never became an issue, too. They wanted us to live the True Faith and be a good example to non-believers outside our chapel
The real issue with the SSPX and CMRI was validity and that was discussed more than nationalism. I remembered growing up in the SSPX, my Sunday school friend's mom told me, "Father said if we go to confession in the Novus Ordo, they have to be ordained in 1963 or before that". In the CMRI, our priests would always tell me, "If you can't make it to Mass here, find a valid priest who offers the traditional Mass. Make sure they were ordained properly!"
In fact, if one of our new parishioners received the New Rite of Confirmation, we strongly exhorted them to get receive conditional confirmation in order to veritably receive the graces of the Holy Spirit.
At Fr. Perez's chapel, there is a disregard for being safe with the True Sacraments and this affixation on this so-called, "sentimental fiftyism". I was criticized by some of his parishioners for telling them the New Rite of Confirmation is invalid. My sedevacantist friend who recently left OLHC once said, "If the sacraments there are truly invalid then may be that explains why a number of their parishioners disregard validity and affix themselves to dated attire, archaic jargon, and elevating white nationalism above the matters of faith"
-
RonCal, I didn't understand quite what you were referring to until I realized that you meant 'modern' when you wrote 'dated' & 'archaic'. Dated attire means old-fashioned clothes - like prairie dresses & tie dyed shirts & archaic means the same thing so that definitely didn't describe them. If you look on the FB page under friends & see how these girls dress with their cleavage & all, I agree that they sure don't fit the image of a Catholic. Their talk leaves something to be desired as well. They sound like government school heathens.
Actually I think most of them now are NO who found a home & never changed their ways or 'converted'. Why would they when they have comedians in the pulpit cracking jokes about sacred things and a bulletin that's non-stop jokes & light-hearted banter?
-
If you look on the FB page under friends & see how these girls dress with their cleavage & all, I agree that they sure don't fit the image of a Catholic. Their talk leaves something to be desired as well. They sound like government school heathens.
Actually I think most of them now are NO who found a home & never changed their ways or 'converted'. Why would they when they have comedians in the pulpit cracking jokes about sacred things and a bulletin that's non-stop jokes & light-hearted banter?
Thorn,
How did you know that they behave such a way in their Facebook profiles? I have a gut feeling I know who you are... I prolly think you are a friend of my friend but I don't intend to divulge your possible name lest I compromise your privacy.
Yes, you are right about many of Fr. Perez's parishioners because a multitude of them are truly dissatisfied Novus Ordo Catholics who attend the Traditional Mass and do not subscribe to the beliefs and teaching of Archbishop Lefebvre or the sedevacantists in regards to the sacraments.
I know one parishioner there that recognizes the canonization of St. Gianna Molla. I even know one parishioner there that still attends the New Mass in Yorba Linda while attending the traditional Mass at OLHC.
In regards to Facebook, some of his parishioners are white supremacists. One posted a stupid article on my friend's Facebook profile saying how Nigerians blacks should be governed by whites!
-
I don't know how they behave on FB, I just saw their profile pictures & was amazed how they dressed & posed.
Are you sure that the person attends a NO Mass in Yorba Linda? Maybe it's the John Paul Center that has a Latin Mass (I think it's in YL) that leaves much to be desired. I attended there once & never again.
OLHC is indeed a mixed bag and not too intelligent to boot. Their writings are an embarrassment.
-
I'm going to try very hard to be respectful here as I need to address a priest's recent open letter to Bishop Fellay. It's going to be hard but I'm going to try. St. Catherine of Siena & St Joan of Arc watch over me.
Unfortunately this is not the first time that Fr. Paul Sretenovic has put his foot in his mouth. Hopefully he'll do some soul-searching & it will be his last.
Tradition in Action just posted an open letter written by Fr. Sretenovic on their website which they've titled, "Why do You Condemn Us When You are in a Similar Situation?". Coincidentally, it's also mentioned, but not posted in its entirety, on Traditio! Umm!
First, some background so you can get a better picture of this letter:
Fr. Sretenovic is a very young, inexperienced priest who was born around the time that Vatican II came into being & was ordained in the NO. He's well meaning & sincere but lacking in training as you can well imagine. He came to Fr. Perez's church the first week of January, 2005 after reading some books & things on tradition & attending a traditional Conference where he met Fr. Perez. On January 30, 2005 he said his first public traditional Latin Mass!! This was too soon and it wasn't his finest moment. Fr. Perez wasn't even there to monitor or help. He (Fr. Sretenovic) wasn't at this church for very long before he said - from the pulpit!- that he was having serious doubts about his validity. This never should have been mentioned like that. Bishop Pivarunas was going to conditionally ordain him in Oct, 2006 at Mt St. Michael in WA, but I'm quite sure that that never happened. Fr. Perez has spoken out against sedevacantism many times.
There are many irregularities & unsettling things that go on at this church, but as there is no bishop to appeal to and Fr. Perez WILL do things HIS way with no one to rein him in or counsel him, many people have simply walked. Fr. Perez USES the SPPX for Confirmations, yet he has stated - from the pulpit!- to keep away from the SPPX, as dealing with them is like dealing with snakes!!!! That they're (the congregation) are right where they should be - in an independent chapel.
Now comes Fr. Sretenovic, still wet behind the ears, lacking traditional training, and having a mentor who fancies himself quite the comedian; having the temerity, the audacity, to address a long-standing SPPX Bishop with an open letter?! Like Bishop Fellay would even have time or the inclination to read the thing anyway. It is hard to read, by the way. This is a case of treading where angels fear to tread or a full blown case of hubris, or both.
-
Can I see a link of this letter??
-
The link to Fr. Sretenovic's letter, or 'interpellation', is:
traditioninaction.org. Click on 'The Latest Updates', then, 'Interpellation to Bishop Fellay on Independent Priests' for February 16.
-
There's something about these priests at OLHC that seems as if they try for the public eye quite a bit in the past few years... WHich is contrary to everything I know about Fr. Sretenovic. Even though I have high doubts as to his own validity, he is one of the most humble men I've ever met- ever. Actually, when he came to tradition, my family was quite involved with assisting him in moving from his Diocese; we put him in contact with our SSPX priest, and had them both over for dinner at our home so they could talk.
I think his move to Perez's chapel was the worst thing he could have done. He should have gone to the SSPX or CMRI for additional training and development. If he had doubts to his validity at all, surely Perez has stomped them out. He doesn't believe in that 'stuff'.
-
s2srea, you are so right! Fr. Sretenovic IS humble, spiritual, kind, & willing to learn. You can't help but like him. Unfortunately he's in the wrong place & for whatever reason doesn't want to move on. Is it because he's got it good & easy there? The weather sure would beat New Jersey weather for one thing. Other people have tried to talk him into going to a seminary to finish his training but he doesn't. Why?
For many reasons Fr. Perez is not a good influence in forming young priests. Fr. Perez is young himself & grew up NO and still has some of that mindset. The joking from the pulpit & the jokes about sacred things & subjects that Fr. Perez constantly does is wearing off on Fr. Sretenovic and now he's starting to do the same thing. It's true that many of the original trads that started that church have either died or left in disgust and so there's a lot of ex-NOs there now & maybe these young priests think that the joking appeals to this new breed or maybe in fact it does. I just think that there's a time & a place for everything. I love a good joke but the pulpit is not the place & Mass is not the time.
This isn't Fr. Sretenovic's first public letter or essay. When I read his first little essay, I thought that he needed to get a few more years of experience under his belt before venturing into the public arena to expound on things. Again, he seems to be taking his cue from Fr. Perez who imagines himself to be a great orator.
-
I need to correct myself a tad bit. First I stated that Fr. Sretenovic was humble, then went on to say it was a case of hubris! I think sometimes lack of confidence is mistaken for humility. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.
-
I need to correct myself a tad bit. First I stated that Fr. Sretenovic was humble, then went on to say it was a case of hubris! I think sometimes lack of confidence is mistaken for humility. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.
Well I still think he is humble Thorn, over having a lack of confidence. To tell the difference, ask yourself this: Knowing the difference in the two men (Frs. Perez and Stretenovic), could you imagine Fr. Stretenovic being this public ANYWHERE else besides OLHC? I can't.
-
Well now, that's food for thought. Are you saying that since Fr. Perez likes to be a public figure & he is Fr. S's mentor, that Fr. S. is taking his cue from him and venturing into the public arena? Fr. Perez does seem to want to put OLHC on the map so to speak.
At first it seemed odd that Fr. S would antagonize the leading Bishop of the SPPX being as they USE them for Confirmation. Then I remembered my prediction that Fr. Perez is on his way to becoming a bishop himself, so -- he wouldn't need the SPPX. He wouldn't need anyone!
-
At first it seemed odd that Fr. S would antagonize the leading Bishop of the SPPX being as they USE them for Confirmation. Then I remembered my prediction that Fr. Perez is on his way to becoming a bishop himself, so -- he wouldn't need the SPPX. He wouldn't need anyone!
NOW I think you're headed in the right direction.
And what better way to pave the road you will travel, than to have someone else do it for you. Capiche?
-
Capiche!
-
What an uncharitable bunch of posts, folks. I am a parishioner. I would be willing to answer any questions you have. Please, no calumny!
-
What an uncharitable bunch of posts, folks. I am a parishioner. I would be willing to answer any questions you have. Please, no calumny!
How large is the Vietnamese community in the parish?
-
What an uncharitable bunch of posts, folks. I am a parishioner. I would be willing to answer any questions you have. Please, no calumny!
It's only 'calumny' if the statements are *false*.
-
How large is the Vietnamese community in the parish?
You know, I don't know that. I am not very good at estimating numbers. I can say it is a vibrant community with a significant number. We have a catechism class which is in Vietnamese. Also at our annual Oktoberfest we have a booth with Vietnamese food. At Lunar New Year Monsignor greeted the Vietnamese in Vietnamese saying something like, May you have a happy new year. And you'll see a lady or two wear the nice Vietnamese gown for a special occasion. So the presence is there.
What an uncharitable bunch of posts, folks. I am a parishioner. I would be willing to answer any questions you have. Please, no calumny!
It's only 'calumny' if the statements are *false*.
Yes, I understand. I personally know Monsignor, and most of the comments thus far were based on ignorance, a lack of charity, and some downright lies, like he is out for money. Absolutely terrible! What a complete lack of respect, or even common decency. Monsignors been giving his whole life to tradition for over twenty years now, and treated like dirt by most of the Church, and here are "trads" doing the same, just from the opposite extreme. It was pretty shameful and surprising when out of dungs and giggles I googled Monsignor, and out spits this thread. Definitely some calumny, also come detraction, and what even seems like a bit of sour grapes. So I offered to give someone informed answers who wanted the truth, good or bad, from a charitable perspective.
-
How large is the Vietnamese community in the parish?
It's quite small. There's only about 8 people who attend the Vietnamese catechism class, and there's a few other Vietnamese families who attend the parish that I'm aware of.
-
Thank you both for the information. 8 people is a start. Do you happen to know what type of catechism class it is? Is it for catechumens? Recent newcomers to tradition? Simply a sort of get-to-together-and-study-the-catechism club (such clubs thrive in the Vietnamese Novus Ordo communities, and they are usually beneficial to the faith)?
The church is in the middle of the largest over-seas Vietnamese community in the world; a few families is at least something. Unfortunately, due to the concentration of various Oriental immigrants in that area, a number of ethnic Protestant churches have popped up; many cults surrounding a self-proclaimed mystic, etc also exist in that area. This does make the Novus Ordo goers suspicious, and rightly so, of churches not connected to the Diocese.
-
What an uncharitable bunch of posts, folks. I am a parishioner. I would be willing to answer any questions you have. Please, no calumny!
It's only 'calumny' if the statements are *false*.
Yes, I understand. I personally know Monsignor, and most of the comments thus far were based on ignorance, a lack of charity, and some downright lies, like he is out for money. Absolutely terrible! What a complete lack of respect, or even common decency. Monsignors been giving his whole life to tradition for over twenty years now, and treated like dirt by most of the Church, and here are "trads" doing the same, just from the opposite extreme. It was pretty shameful and surprising when out of dungs and giggles I googled Monsignor, and out spits this thread. Definitely some calumny, also come detraction, and what even seems like a bit of sour grapes. So I offered to give someone informed answers who wanted the truth, good or bad, from a charitable perspective.
This is quite condescending. "You had an experience with a cleric firsthand, but I will 'straighten you out' and clear up your delusions for you"
Did you really read the thread?
My statement about what he did/said was *firsthand*. I heard his uncharitable bloviating with my own ears.
What, *exactly* can you inform me about my own personal experience?
I'm definitely not the only one who recounted firsthand experience either.
You're patronizing to minimize firsthand accounts and act like this is a bunch of gossipy ladies at a bridge club repeating hearsay. Of those that *did* repeat hearsay, you may have a point, but you only enumerate three possibilities: calumny (nothing I said was untrue unless you intend to call me a liar), detraction (it is not something I *believe* to be true, I said something I *know* to be true) or sour grapes (meaningless, not sinful, and doesn't diminish the truth of a statement).
I guess that leaves, by virtue of your ambiguity, painting my posts as 'sour grapes'. To posit 'Sour grapes' is unCatholic. Sour grapes is the complaint of one who did not attain a desired end, such as a win in sports or other contest. I'm sorry, but desiring the sacraments (valid sacraments), while indeed something I seek, should not be minimized nor treated as the loss of a competitive event, much less one refereed by a boorish, arrogant cleric.
Further, he is merely being hoisted by his own petard. He is pedantic about validity of all sorts of sacraments from the pulpit (need I point out this constitutes 'public'?), including or even especially the validity of the Holy Orders of others. Then when his own dubious validity is highlighted (needless to say his hypocrisy as well!) We are somehow 'uncharitable'?!
You had better be joking or obtuse.
The man was 'ordained' by a Bishop who himself was consecrated under the new rites of consecration. This is the same man who makes a career out of decrying such forms, but apparently when it imparts him with authority, he is willing to overlook such important details and suspend his pedantry.
Then he goes and becomes a 'monsignor' (which is essentially meaningless, not being any actual sort of Order, he is still 'only' a priest...if that), and again through dubious channels, and again, willing to gloss over details and pick no nits.
He's a hypocritical, proud, loudmouthed boor, and more than a little crass, prone to rage and a control freak.
-
Juvenalis et al.,
You sort of showed your hand there. Thorn was the one who spoke most, but you delivered your share lack of charity, before and now. To respond, I am not looking down on you, but looking straight at you and others and calling you out of the disgusting display of this thread, which has been lacking in charity, low on substance, and high in heresay. Whatever your experience with Monsignor is quite beside the fact since even if the facts are true, you deliver them in an uncharitable fashion, and in the context of this thread amounts to no less than detraction. You stated: "He's just a blowhard. He might bloviate me to death, but I withstood his oral Santa Ana winds during his 'homilies' enough before, that I'm not terribly worried." And he is "rage-prone," "a control freak," and "pedantic." Further you misunderstand detraction. Quite plainly: "Detraction is the unjust damaging of another's good name by the revelation of some fault or crime of which that other is really guilty or at any rate is seriously believed to be guilty by the defamer" (Catholic Encyclopedia). I don't know your soul, but what you said was plainly aimed on its face to detract from Monsignor's public reputation. You sum up quite nicely your lack of charity: "He's a hypocritical, proud, loudmouthed boor, and more than a little crass, prone to rage and a control freak." Your words cut out any benefit someone outside of your choir may have had. And let any man of goodwill see what was just stated, and what has been stated for nine pages, which I will recount in part for you below. And let anyone who has two brains cells worth of knowledge of the Catholic Faith compare Monsignor Perez and most of the group of posters of this thread. Please, come by Our Lady Help of Christians. Stay and see. See why we are growing, and why our faith is vibrant and making positive changes in the Church. Then compare that experience with the dismal malaise of this thread.
Now, the original post was referring to a request of prayer on FE, and the thread launched into a shameful display of lack of charity, misinformation, with calumny and detraction. Even if there was noteworthy information to be discussed about Monsignor, it was conducted in a way to detract from his public reputation. Since I know Monsignor, being a good friend of his for about nine years now, I felt it was warranted to point out that this was the case. Here are some specifics from the thread thus far with my responses. Let those with a Catholic sense judge. And please do pray for Monsignor, for if he is as bad as you make out, then surely he is in need of prayers.
1. Thorn responded to the original post by placing out the question as to why he received the honor of monsignor: "To make yourself look more important than you are?" Here we already see the tone of lack of charity and assuming the worst possible motives -- pride.
2. Immediately we see the question of valid ordination taken up, with various declarations based on armchair theology and lack of any authority to make such pronouncements. Even if there was a doubt, such a method of handling it is uncharitable.
As it stands, Monsignor was ordained by Cardinal Stickler in 1993 for service with the Institute of Christ the King.
I have no interest in debating sede points of contention. If you think Monsignor is not validly ordained, your problem is somewhere else. Debate those points on another thread, since by extension practically no one is ordained right now, and other extreme conclusions.
3. After this Thorn further adds by implication that Monsignor is sort of "liberal" about faith and morals, since he apparently had a link to Fish Eaters in the bulletin, morally supports a professional local surfer in our congregation (a convert no less), further detracting from his good public reputation.
4. Thorn further adds that he is "... a young, brash, worldly man ...." This is strange because he is 52 years old and has been a priest for 19 years. Hardly young. As for brash, that would need to be clarified. He certainly can be accused of being brash at times, but that is certainly not a characteristic of his personality. He has a strong personality, but he is careful too. And worldly doesn't fit either. He likes cigars and wine, and has a educated palette, can speak numerous languages, and has experience living in various places in Europe. Furthermore like many with the Institute of Christ the King, he likes the finery of the vestments and such like. If being a well-rounded, educated man is worldly, then Thorn has redefined that word in the context of the Faith. Monsignor has his priorities straight and always has the Faith as number one.
5. Thorn then comments on him becoming a bishop. Every once and in while we joke about him becoming Pope, mostly because he'd dismantle about everything there is modernist, and it is a little funny. But realistically he seems quite committed to his flocks on the local level. Only recently did he start to participate more in conferences and such like. He is very good on the local level. So I don't think he is really seeking that level.
6. Then Thorn post concerning banns for marriage, stating that Monsignor picks and chooses which banns are read based on the amount of money they have, or power they have. This claims is absurd, because any parishioner there knows that all banns are read for every wedding no matter their income level or occupation, etc. This false statement was made to further add dissuade people for having a favorable opinion of Monsignor.
7. Thorn adds that Monsignor doesn't give out much of his background. He may not announce it from the pulpit, probably just to thwart the busybodies who demand one's life history before they attend the church, but any friend can know his background in seconds. He's saved you a lot of time by giving you a good run down of his background here: http://www.truerestorationpress.com/videos/. Or a preview here: http://truerestoration.blogspot.com/2011/05/interview-with-father-patrick-perez.html.
8. Then Thorn and s2srea question Monsignor's rationale for asking Bishop Fama to leave Our Lady Help of Christians. The simple fact is that Fr Fama got ordained a bishop without any knowledge of Monsignor Perez, even though Bishop Fama at that time was serving at Monsignor's church under his pastorship. No matter the rationale of Bishop Fama, Monsignor does not agree with that action, nor with his theological opinions concerning validity of priests and bishops. He was within rights to do this since it is his church, and his understanding of the Catholic Faith. The whole thing was surprise to us since Bishop Fama used to preach about angels. He never said a thing about validity of consecrations, etc. Ever since this happened in like 2003 or something, Monsignor has never said anything about him from the pulpit.
9. Thorn then states that "... he needs to go to anger management classes. He's crucified people from the pulpit who have dared speak up, he's threatened and expelled others." Of course, this is written to make him look like a Hitler or a Stalin. This is extremely strange a characterization since he is one of the most charitable priests I have met. He does give sermons that challenge people in terms of rising to the occasion, and on occasion he'll point out that he is getting tired of preaching morality which people duly ignore (like modesty), but anger, threatening, and expelling are not the quality of his sermons. He may have expelled a few people here and there, but maybe they deserved it. I have gone against him on a few points, and mostly he'll just ignore you. Usually the issue is solved silently. I did see him once tell someone that they needed to know their place, but mostly because people treat priests like dirt today. There is a tactful way to question a priest and try to change policy. Usually people aren't very tactful, and a strong personality like Monsignor will shut it down pretty quickly. Think: he has a congregation of hundreds of families, in multiple locations. Sometimes you're going to get a gruff priest. Grow up and live with it. Anyone in a close relationship with another person knows that people vary in mood. Some priests even do this to help people grow spiritually (seriously). Grow up, and deal with it. As for acceptance, Monsignor has always been open to input and has implemented changes based on feedback from the flock. Such a change was adding a cry room, and having another priest not tell parishioners who are outside the church building with children (because of behavior) that they don't fulfill their Sunday obligation.
10. I don't need to go into the silly straw subdeacon thing. Just another item to try to detract, and shows some posters complete ignorance of what they are talking about. What he did was ligit, and necessary to celebrate solemn high Mass on Christmas. (One of our priests is on an extended sick leave.) The man who served as subdeacon is our master of ceremonies, a regular face around here, and probably going to be a priest. But we see here another instance of lack of charity, because they assumed he was just willy-nilly doing things, instead of implementing traditional options of the Roman Rite which he learned from (expert) Fr Franck Quoëx at ICK.
11. Talavera posted an email which Monsignor sent to someone about "black beams". Monsignor took the photo, and thought it was of interest to the person he sent it to. He did not give that person permission to public the email, and Monsignor in general is not a conspiracy stuff, although, as the email states, we all know the claims and have our independent opinions on them. He never preaches on any of that stuff. Talavera probably didn't ask Monsignor about the photo, though, but instead via internet cathedra declares him a heretic, and that he leads us in "those directions." All by the fallacy of guilt of association. (juvenalis added his opinions to to this effect.)
12. Thorn further invective by stating that Monsignor gives "puerile sermons" which lack substance ("splattered with one-liners that he giggles at"). He cites reviews he gave on products, as though a priest cannot have an opinion of products.
13. In addition, Thorn with Juvenalis imply that Monsignor is lazy, or wastes his time, therefore by further implication neglecting some priestly duty. Monsignor is a hard working priest. OLHC has congregations in Garden Grove, Los Angeles, and Ventura. They also serve a group in Yucca Valley, and often come to the aid of parishioners who are not served by the diocesan clergy (e.g., a sick call, etc.) To say he is lazy is a bit much to say the least. A lazy priest would have a stunted congregation. Not so here. We grow every day in parishioners. Even the building we acquired has over the last ten years become a nice beautiful space. SO if you think he is lazy, try doing to same stuff, and then we'll talk.
14. Thorn adds: "I've been warned by someone I met only once a couple of years ago after I left his church to be careful, that I'm dealing with a hornet's nest. This person was not smiling & wouldn't explain." This is meant to imply that Monsignor has thugs who intimidate people. This uncharitable statement is meant to add more doubt, but notice how little is actually stated by him. (Juvenalis agreed at how absurd this sounds.)
Need I go on? I won't, because it is all too much. God bless, my friends.
-
Quit using the word 'uncharitable' in every sentence. It doesn't mean something isn't true.
You also seem to lack an understanding of the word 'hearsay' don't you? Firsthand accounts are not hearsay. Ever.
You're a clown.
I'm done with you and your fingerwagging.
You merely state and restate and restate what you wish to prove. Learn to make a point.
-
Quit using the word 'uncharitable' in every sentence. It doesn't mean something isn't true.
I know. It means it is uncharitable. That is why I reused the word -- to hit home the message.
You also seem to lack an understanding of the word 'hearsay' don't you? Firsthand accounts are not hearsay. Ever.
Please note I was referring to more people than you. My posts were not about you by yourself.
You're a clown.
I'm done with you and your fingerwagging.
You merely state and restate and restate what you wish to prove. Learn to make a point.
I think you made it for me with these words.
If one is right, then one will want to convince others of this truth. You treating me with derision shows me that you are not interested in helping me, if I am in error, but in scoring points for some reason. A basic point of interpreting someone's intentions is how they act when pressed. Even if I had treated you unjustly, our Catholic Faith teaches us to not return that, but to return charity and goodness. As such, I had supplied due evidence that this thread is full of uncharitable criticism of Monsignor Perez, filled with objectively sinful displays of calumny and detraction, and is therefore behavior unfitting for Catholics. I am not your judge, but want to lay out the record in case someone comes here thinking they're getting a fair analysis of Monsignor Perez and his qualities.
I ask God to bless you all.
-
Oh I see, you're one of his flying monkeys. Doing his bidding...
-
Hi, Infobomber!
You invited questions, so here's a few:
1. Since we've been accused of accusing Fr. Perez of being 'about the money' -- How's his little perfume business doing? He creates exotic perfumes for men & women & sells it in the vestibule of the church, right? The last one I know of was 'Whale Puke' for men. That was quite awhile ago, so what's the latest offering? Also how's those tags with saints for your pet dog or cat that he also sells in the vestibule?
What do you think of a priest who sells blessed candles with this advertisement---- "Rubrically correct, Hyper Traditional, Mega-Extremely Blessed 100% Beeswax"? This man's just a barrel of laughs, isn't he?
2. How many houses or properties does he own?
3. Yes, 52 is relatively young. So you must be much younger? If you've only known him since 2002, you're a newcomer & really don't know the whole story.
4. The ball's in your court to prove that Fr. Perez has his priorities straight & always has the Faith as number one. I don't believe it & the facts prove otherwise. Cigars & wine aren't his only worldly interests are they? If that's what you believe you don't really know him well & I think that Fr. Perez would be the first to tell you to back off on this before more is told.
5.Prove that ALL banns of marriage are posted &/or read. Excuse my bluntness but that's an absolute LIE. Time after time after time have marriages been held there with no banns & we're left wondering who got married. I never said that only those with money had banns read. Only a select few had banns read. I don't know if it was a case of money or not.
6. No information was really given on truerestoration. You would have to buy the video to get the rest of the story.
7. How were those people that were expelled deserving of expulsion? How was it mediated or was it, since there's no bishop?
8. Why would Fr. Perez say anything from the pulpit about Fr. Fama now? It's a moot point now. Also I can live with a gruff priest as I am grown-up. Fr. Perez goes beyond gruff, believe me. You definitely don't know the whole story!! & that's the truth!
9. Again, you misrepresented me about the straw sub-deacon. I NEVER meant or said that he was doing things will-nilly. He's a pious young man who did his job to the best of his ability. That wasn't the point. You missed it.
10. Another misrepresentation: That was NOT a private email about the 'black beams'. That was a website & he was told that the pictures would be posted.
11. Father gave one sermon that I know of when he gave his opinion on a product. That's NOT what I was referring to, but his constant reviewing of things on the internet that most traditional priests wouldn't have an interest in. So yes, he must have a lot of time on his hands to do this. I didn't post everything because it's quite embarrassing & gives a bad example of a priest. He is far from hard-working in the field of the Faith. Why did he drop Bakersfield? He whined & complained about going there. Yes, now there's more trad chapels there so maybe people started to go to them & that's why he dropped it, but he is the first priest that I've ever heard complaining from the pulpit about traveling. He needs to read the life story of Fr. DeSmet and a few other truly hard-working priests.
Do you want me to go on, infobomber? I won't, even if there's more to the story. I could care less if you don't get it. With all due respect you can return to under your rock. I've known Fr. Perez longer than you. It's not a pretty picture. Hopefully the prayers of some people will make a difference & Fr. will see his mistakes & reform. There's no need for you to call people names just because they point out things that are wrong & need correcting.
-
A few more questions for infobomber.
As the world knows, Fr.'s birthday is March 16th, and he thought it should be duly commemorated- so what if it's Lent! The 2007 potluck bash was on Saturday March 17th & even featured green margaritas & green beer for the devout trads of OLHC! March 16th, 2008 fell on Sunday & there was a Pancake Breakfast in his honor. 2009 was just a mention of March 16th being his birthday. This would never do!!
On January 10th, 2010, Father announced to the world: "I just want you all to put it on your calendar. Yes, it is a Saturday in Lent. I will give you some sort of indulgence for that. My birthday is always in Lent. So guess what? We will end Lent by a day & we WILL [emphasis mine] celebrate my birthday on Saturday (March 6). Since it is going to be a dinner, it comes under 1st Vespers....... I'll figure it out." He said more but I don't have that part. Then, starting January 24th until the end of February, every bulletin featured a notice about this important event!! Is he practicing being pope here?
Question: Does this sound like a worldly egocentric?
I disagree that he is interested in the local scene. Many people are ignored there. He can't wait to go to Conferences to lecture & just 'get away'.
I see I'm not the only one commenting on him being pope. He (& you) can really see him fixing the world?!
Does Father really believe in 'cosmic energy"? Will you tell us more about his interest in 'Black Beams'?
-
How about you all spend your energies and time praying for him instead of gossiping about his faults (which, by the way IS the sin of detraction).
-
I will entertain these questions for the sake of being straightforward for the other readers.
1. I think your objections are rather silly. You put off an air of someone who has no sense of humor. You may not like his style of humor, but at least he can put a smile on his face. For someone you and others portray as a gruff and grumpy man, complaining about his apparent lack of stoic reverence at all times seems to contradict. Just keep in mind that everything in the bookstore is freely given provided someone donates a stated amount to the Church. We all are probably familiar with this workaround for distributing blessed items. Everything is priced at cost, and in the case of the (exotic?) perfumes, they are made BY HIM, and the proceeds are put into the church's general fund. I have his aftershave, and it is nice. He makes like one batch a year. And for Christmas he gave a bunch to our boutique group which was pure "profit" for the school to use for construction. This donating spirit included various pieces of silverware and a few swords (one was a replica of Gandalf's sword Glamdring). So if he is all about money, then why does he freely give these things away to be sold for the church and school? And if you think he shouldn't have these possessions in the first place, I would ask anyone to think about the fact that he is a SECULAR priest, i.e., he has no vow of poverty, and that if people offer him gifts, on many occasions it would be rude to not accept. I was there for the sword being given, and it was for his tenth year anniversary. A lot of work was put into that sword, and it would have been extremely rude to say he couldn't accept because of some scruple. But tactfully he donated it to the boutique nine years later, and a few years after the donating family has since moved away. So anyone familiar with him knows that he freely accepts gifts, and freely gives them. He himself is helping support a few unemployed families from the church's funds, so spare the indignation.
2. He owns no personal properties. His parents own two properties which he makes use of. If you think it is a sin to have successful parents, then I can't help you there.
3. Yes, I am younger than 52. But that doesn't matter. He is not a young person. Whatever standard you have in mind, most people would see a 52 year old man with 19 years of marriage and a few kids as "seasoned". So a priest with 19 years and a strong congregation is hardly wet behind the ears. He was brought in by Father Schell, who was a priest for something like fifty years, and was one of the people who laid the ground of tradition is the greater LA area here. So Monsignor is participating in a line of tradition that is older than he is.
4. ???
5. I have more things to do with my time than audit the church as to its bann reading practice. My statement is from common sense and common experience. But you reveal your double-tongued ways. You said, "I never said that only those with money had banns read. Only a select few had banns read. I don't know if it was a case of money or not." Bt this contradicts your earlier post which read, "Because the only banns that are announced or posted are for the favored ones, that is, those with money or the ones in power. Many, many marriages have been performed there without banns announced. Very few ordinary ones get posted or announced." You seem excessive worried about banns. If you are such a veteran in the trad movement, you'd know banns are almost completely ceremonial at this point in the game. Mine were read, and everybody I can think of had theirs read, so I've never had any reason to fret over such a insignificant thing. Nor have I thought of marriages as an occasion of investigation, but as a cause of celebration.
6. Strange. He tells you in the preview about his thoughts of vocation, the places he went to, and his eventual ordination with ICK.
7. Why should whether they deserved it or not be our business, unless of course he gave you the boot? I didn't know a parish was a democracy. If you want a parish council, then go to a bureaucracy leaden local parish. We all know that the traditionalist scene in many circuмstances is attaching yourself to a priest and riding that out, i.e., a monarchy. Every traditionalist parish is going to have these types of things. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry has an agenda and "vision" of how things should go. But when you go to OLHC, you're getting Monsignor Perez's vision. And somewhere else, someone else's vision. If you don't like it, you move on. I am not here to certify the vision in itself, although his vision has been proven by its fruits, I am here to call you and others out for your uncharitable ways which seem to aim to cut down instead of lift.
8. Okay, I am ignorant. Let's give you that. That does not justify your words.
9. You contradict yourself again. You said, "Again, you misrepresented me about the straw sub-deacon. I NEVER meant or said that he was doing things will-nilly." But your plain words cannot be escaped: "Father didn't have enough priests to put on a Really Big Show for an important Mass. What did he do? He simply picked a young man from the flock, dressed him in priestly vestments, called him a straw sub-deacon & on with the show!!!!" So you make it sound like this "young man" is some random guy, instead of our master of ceremonies. You then confess you don't know what you're talking about when you said, "What, pray tell, is a straw sub-deacon? Falsity has no place at the true Mass. Either a man is a deacon or he is not, so what difference does it make what he wears??" and, "Where have you heard about a straw sub-deacon? In the NO? I've never in my life heard of one till this incident," and, "The straw sub-deacon was a complete layman in priest's vestments that matched the other priest's vestments who acted as a deacon (or maybe he acted as a sub-deacon too)." So you don't know what a straw subdeacon is, and completely mix up subdeacon with deacon and priest. You finally admit that you were wrong in your statements when you said, "I'm sorry, I stand corrected. I checked the pictures again, & indeed the priest who is acting as a deacon or subdeacon, and the young layman are both wearing either tunicles or dalmatics." Why should such a veteran in tradition as you mistaken these things?
10. Yes, they were private emails. He did not give him permission to post the email, but only the photos. There is a difference between an email and photos attached to an email.
11. Who's worse? A priest who posts reviews of products online (how long should that take?), or the person who apparently has hunted down all of said reviews and been able to positively identify them with Monsignor (and how long should that take?)?
As for Bakersfield, which is a 2 1/2 hour drive one way, it was a cost-benefit analysis, not being lazy. LA and Garden Grove have always been the core of Father Schell's mission. Ventura and Bakersfield are "extras". Bakersfield was dropped because the numbers were going down, and they have a Mass up there. In the case of Ventura, which will be dropped soon I am sure, the congregation is getting old and dying. And all of this was part of a general trend in refocusing on the core mission and not dissipating your resources. He never just drops them, but gives them provisions. These people are not without the sacraments of tradition. And it is false that he is lazy. He has gone to Korea multiple times to minister to those people. He has gone to India to participate in the Fatima Crusader stuff. He will go anywhere to helps someone who wants to get married in the Church. I hardly think you apply your standard to yourself.
And your rant about Monsignor's birthday shows that you may want to step back a bit, and gain some perspective. It seems a little obsessive to remember all these nit-picky things about him, and it even seems like you are keeping records. If you don't like him, then move on. But you can't, which tells me that you are really obsessed, because someone who wasn't wouldn't hold all this useless data in their heads about a priest they don't like, nor want to associate with.
So, to placate you, you can be assured that your prayers are working since this year there will be no birthday bash as of yesterday's bulletin. But perhaps this will change, and this will be the ultimate sin. Anyone who wants to understand Monsignor, just think of him as a kind of Bilbo Baggins. He loves parties, convivial get-togethers, good food, pipe-weed, and such like. Is that a sin? Was Tolkien the greatest of sinners in our time? And having his birthday in Lent, he always ties his birthday to St Patrick's day, which in the diocese of Orange was traditionally a 1st class feast, which had no fasting.
Thorn, I do not portray Monsignor as a saint. He is a man in training as we all should be. I take issue with your words and conduct. This is not how we go about reforming wayward brethren. If Monsignor was the worst traditionalist priest in the US, none of your methods of addressing that would have been sufficient by the standards of the Faith. And this is shown in your posts, which anyone here can read. Let any reader note this. Compare his writings with what I have said, and then come by our church and see for yourself. Our Lady Help of Christians is a flourishing congregation. Monsignor is well respected in the traditionalist sphere. He collaborates with the people from the Remnant, Catholic Family News, Tradition in Action, and Fatima Crusader. He collaborates with the local SSPX congregations and our teenagers are confirmed by their bishops. We have two vocations so far to the Benedictines in New Mexico. Two other men who are seriously pursuing the priesthood right now. This is all out in the open for people to see if they think our congregation is operated by an underhanded man. How can the tree produce good fruit if the root is rotten?
I leave you wish my prayers.
-
Poor infobomber- you're hopelessly hopeless & I've no patience to respond to all your complaints as you don't really want to see anyway. As for my humor, I love a joke but believe that there's a time & a place for it. Joking about the sacred or even making light of it is verboten in my book. Not in your book?
Speaking of the Fatima Conference - Fr. Perez gave an insipid speech & at the end pulled out a plain miniature weath no more than 6 inches across. Then this 52 year old man addressing an audience of mostly older trads, veterans in the field, demonstated how they could poke toothpicks into the wreath every time they did a sacrifice so that it would resemble the crown of thorns. He really did this! When I was a child, I thought as a child & acted like a child but when I grew up I put away the things of a child. Real men wear hair shirts or belts. Real men don't count sacrifices.
As for giving away a gift - that's no skin off his teeth. They have more than 2 properties, too. It's wonderful that his mommie & daddy are very successful & he gets to share the wealth, so why wouldn't they help the unfortunate? That's no great generousity. He actually told you that he's helping some families? Nothing like making sure people know how generous he is. Also I'm not talking about giving & receiving gifts. You don't know Fr. Perez like you think you do.
Neither you nor he seems to know what the purpose of the banns are. They serve an important function yet the banns are not read many more times than they are read for some reason.
It used to be that you could go to any church in the world & the vision was the same & not the vision of a particular priest. Thus the chaos in the churches today I guess.
Fr. Perez did not email a private person but wrote to a website about the black beams & then disparaged little old ladies but we're branded as uncharitable for pointing out some serious breaches of Fr. Perez!
Are you kidding? Fr. LOVES going here & there in the world (except Ventura & Bakersfield) so he doesn't have to contend with the mundane tasks at OLHC. A pope in training must be a world traveler, ya know.
I think you meant to write 'two men are THINKING of pursuing a vocation.' Right? I could be wrong.
I know several people that Fr. neglected while he was concocting his perfume. Which is more important - stirring up a batch of Whale Puke to display his wittiness & generousity by donating it to the church or tending to the spiritual needs of the flock?
-
A FABLE
Once there was a flock of birds that lived up north & traditionally flew south for the winter. This fall, all but one prepared for flight. This one had found a bush with tasty berries that had fermented & he wanted to indulge & frolic a bit longer. He LOVED those tasty berries, so he wished his friends a bon voyage.
At last, with a full tummy & feeling good, he started his journey southward. By now it had turned colder & started to snow which stuck to his wings & feathers causing him to fall to earth. He found himself in a barnyard full of animals. Half frozen, he lay near death, when a big, fat cow came along and dumped on him.
How terrible! It's bad enough to freeze to death but this is truly awful. How uncouth & uncharitable of that cow!
As he lay there though, the warmth of the dung enveloped him & revived him. He poked his head out & started to chirp & sing for he was alive!
The cat heard him & slinked out of the barn & laid down close to him. The bird stopped singing when he spied the cat.
"Oh, please keep on singing," purred the cat. "Come out. Someone of your august talent and beautiful plumage shouldn't be hidden. Come out and sing for us. We haven't seen or heard anything quite this beautiful here in this barnyard," the cat purred on.
The bird wiggled out of the dung heap, shook & fluffed his fine feathers and preened them until they were shiny & beautiful. Then stuck out his chest and sang his heart out as the silly goose and even the turkey over there cast admiring glances his way. What a glorious moment!
As he closed his eyes to hit a high note, the cat pounced on him and had him for lunch.
Now this fable has not one, but FOUR morals.
1. Not everyone who dumps on you is your enemy.
2. Not everyone who flatters you is your friend.
3. Do not veer from your traditional path for the sake of pure, earthly pleasures.
And last but not least:
4. When you find yourself in a pile of doo-doo, keep your mouth shut!!
THE END