Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Fanny on December 19, 2017, 05:25:45 PM
-
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://dioceseofscrantonarchive.org/clight/CatholicLight4-13-17.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwj_yr3El5fYAhWLyoMKHaMPA9wQFgg0MAQ&usg=AOvVaw1SO3SfUqIOwf2Y2c8YLjMR
NOTICE
This notice is to inform the Christian faithful that John
J. Cordaro, formerly a priest of the Oblates of Saint Joseph,
was dismissed from the Oblates by their Superior General on
August 8, 1989. He currently has no faculties whatsoever to
minister in the Catholic Church. Because he has no faculties,
he is forbidden to function as a priest in the Roman Catholic
Church. Furthermore, the Catholic faithful should not receive
the sacraments from Mr. Cordaro or attend his celebration of
the sacraments, wherever they may be held.
http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/official-notice-regarding-john-j-cordaro/
Posted on: 03-3-2011 (http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/2011/03/) Posted in: News (http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/category/news/)
John J. Cordaro, a resident of Scranton and a former priest of the Oblates of Saint Joseph, has been forbidden to exercise priestly ministry. Catholics of the Diocese of Scranton should be mindful that, in view of this prohibition, they may not approach this person for any of the sacraments.
Reverend Brian J. W. Clarke
Vicar General
Diocese of Scranton
-
John J. Cordaro, a resident of Scranton and a former priest of the Oblates of Saint Joseph, has been forbidden to exercise priestly ministry. Catholics of the Diocese of Scranton should be mindful that, in view of this prohibition, they may not approach this person for any of the sacraments.
Reverend Brian J. W. Clarke
Vicar General
Diocese of Scranton
The same could be said of all SSPX, Sede, and independent trad priests, so why did you single this one out?
-
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://dioceseofscrantonarchive.org/clight/CatholicLight4-13-17.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwj_yr3El5fYAhWLyoMKHaMPA9wQFgg0MAQ&usg=AOvVaw1SO3SfUqIOwf2Y2c8YLjMR
NOTICE
This notice is to inform the Christian faithful that John
J. Cordaro, formerly a priest of the Oblates of Saint Joseph,
was dismissed from the Oblates by their Superior General on
August 8, 1989. He currently has no faculties whatsoever to
minister in the Catholic Church. Because he has no faculties,
he is forbidden to function as a priest in the Roman Catholic
Church. Furthermore, the Catholic faithful should not receive
the sacraments from Mr. Cordaro or attend his celebration of
the sacraments, wherever they may be held.
http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/official-notice-regarding-john-j-cordaro/
Posted on: 03-3-2011 (http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/2011/03/) Posted in: News (http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/category/news/)
John J. Cordaro, a resident of Scranton and a former priest of the Oblates of Saint Joseph, has been forbidden to exercise priestly ministry. Catholics of the Diocese of Scranton should be mindful that, in view of this prohibition, they may not approach this person for any of the sacraments.
Reverend Brian J. W. Clarke
Vicar General
Diocese of Scranton
Technically, neither do most traditionalist priests. In saner times, they'd be saying this exact sentence about the SSPX as they have no jurisdiction, apostolic succession or faculties from the mainstream church.
-
The same could be said of all SSPX, Sede, and independent trad priests, so why did you single this one out?
Hardly.
The sspx is a canonically recognised order.
"Independent trad priests" have not necessarily been kicked out of their order and many independent priests have a bishop in a canonically sound order.
To call him "mr." means he has been laicised.
"Fr." Cordaro has been presented as a legitimate priest at OLMC, ky.
-
2006, page 11, priests not in good standing, includes "fr." Cordaro
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.dioceseofpgh.org/sites/default/files/CanonCivilLawReview.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi705f61pfYAhXF4IMKHaOFD8UQFgg5MAY&usg=AOvVaw0PuUemdE0sIXLpqV0Nul1A
-
The same could be said of all SSPX, Sede, and independent trad priests, so why did you single this one out?
One notices a particularly strong dislike for all things associated with the Kentucky priests from Fanny. Unfortunately it’s a little too pervasive and all consuming, at least here on this forum, for one to trust every new spin fanny tries to offer us. This one being no exception.
For as Last tradican so aptly points out, prior to +BF’s maneuvers of 2012, these diocesan words would have been directed at all sspx priests.
So in the interest of fairness and showing we are not unduly discriminating, Ms. Fanny, why are you asking us to believe there is something more sinister with this particular priest you created this thread about.
Because what you have proffered here doesn’t cut it.
-
If any priest is forbidden to exercise ministry, quite specifically like this, by a diocese, it would be highly irregular to carry on as if you had a better reason to ignore the censure.
-
if a priest is kicked out if his order he is not generally laicised.
Laicization is punishment for something really bad and generally of a moral nature.
My opinion does not matter. And I am not asking anyone to believe anything. Read the facts and determine for yourselves.
-
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.dioceseofpgh.org/sites/default/files/CanonCivilLawReview.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi705f61pfYAhXF4IMKHaOFD8UQFgg5MAY&usg=AOvVaw0PuUemdE0sIXLpqV0Nul1A (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.dioceseofpgh.org/sites/default/files/CanonCivilLawReview.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi705f61pfYAhXF4IMKHaOFD8UQFgg5MAY&usg=AOvVaw0PuUemdE0sIXLpqV0Nul1A)
[expletives deleted]!
It would be greatly appreciated if before we CathInfo members post Web addresses on C.I., each of us would make the courteous brief effort that's needed to clean off the garbage with which Google needlessly encrusts Web addresses, whenever docuмents are otherwise available normally, i.e., without recourse to any specialized Web service from Google [×].
In this case, that courteous brief effort for one's fellow CathInfo members makes the difference between these:
· 202-character Google-encrusted Web address, in which its sheer length makes it easy to overlook the fact that it accesses a [expletive-deleted] PDF file; altho' in plain sight out at characters 123--125, not only are those tell-tale 3 characters preceded by 122 characters, but they're also followed by 77 more characters of Google garbage;
versus
· simple 71-character Web address, which plainly shows it's a PDF file, without extra alertness nor effort being demanded from a C.I. reader:
<http://www.dioceseofpgh.org/sites/default/files/CanonCivilLawReview.pdf (http://www.dioceseofpgh.org/sites/default/files/CanonCivilLawReview.pdf)>
Likewise, a Web address in the original posting of this topic:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://dioceseofscrantonarchive.org/clight/CatholicLight4-13-17.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwj_yr3El5fYAhWLyoMKHaMPA9wQFgg0MAQ&usg=AOvVaw1SO3SfUqIOwf2Y2c8YLjMR (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://dioceseofscrantonarchive.org/clight/CatholicLight4-13-17.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwj_yr3El5fYAhWLyoMKHaMPA9wQFgg0MAQ&usg=AOvVaw1SO3SfUqIOwf2Y2c8YLjMR)
Which when courteously cleaned up, becomes simply:
<http://dioceseofscrantonarchive.org/clight/CatholicLight4-13-17.pdf (http://dioceseofscrantonarchive.org/clight/CatholicLight4-13-17.pdf)>
Altho' that file occupies a whopping 33.7 megabytes! Whoa! What else do I get from downloading such a huge file?
CathInfo does seem to have a few members whose Internet-surfing skills are not adequate for providing such courtesies, but it would not be credible to claim that the sternly dogged Fanny would be entitled to any dispensations applying the same excuse.
-------
Note ×: E.g., the "specialized Web service" used to display the printed content that's been captured by Google Books. As savvy Internet users know, Google's fundamental corporate hostility to personal privacy is a compelling reason for the slogan "Google is evil ! "
-
I am sorry.
I will try what you suggest, but I am totally inept at such things. Research I can do, but I am not tech savvy.
-
So in the interest of fairness and showing we are not unduly discriminating, Ms. Fanny, why are you asking us to believe there is something more sinister with this particular priest you created this thread about.
Fanny said:
I am not asking anyone to believe anything. Read the facts and determine for yourselves.
Fanny, is there no summary of why he was kicked out? All you posted was that he no longer has faculties. Why does he not have faculties anymore? Does the docuмent not say? If it doesn't say, are we supposed to google and come up with our own opinion? What does that solve?
-
Fanny, is there no summary of why he was kicked out? All you posted was that he no longer has faculties. Why does he not have faculties anymore? Does the docuмent not say? If it doesn't say, are we supposed to google and come up with our own opinion? What does that solve?
Written here on CI, back in 2013, this is not definitive, but perhaps it can shed light on why information can be scarce.
Offline eddiearent (https://us8.proxysite.com/process.php?d=x5B99FmPCRZRht%2FXXFnVgYpFOHZPmnl9qMy7xWWOuPavEmSybWcuCA%3D%3D&b=1)
Name That Priest (https://us8.proxysite.com/process.php?d=x5B99FmPCRZRht%2FXXFnVgYpFOHZPmXhitoilxTmCr%2BanGWalJWc%2FUHkD5RHsyKeZFVnj1jwukvQBvDSetMrDonM3cWTk&b=1#msg303536)
« Reply #8 on: July 31, 2013, 10:46:48 PM »
I served as webmaster for the chapel in Sanford since 2005 through earlier this year. You may have remembered last year there was a docuмent from Rome in regards to a "friend of the Society chapel" which was in Jacksonville. The docuмent basically said that someone couldn't go to this Mass. The Church belongs to Fr. Marshall Roberts. The docuмent was turned into the Internet on a Thursday and on Friday my phone was blown up by Fr. Duvergier and Vernoy regarding this docuмent and that any mention of either Fr. Roberts of his chapel had to be removed.
On the SSPX chapel website we had pictures of Fr. Roberts since he assisted at a rather poorly executed altar consecration (in which during the ceremony amongst other things the altar stone broke). I received numerous calls from the priests (despite being at work and helping patients and nurses with discharges from hospitals across America) that not only did these images/texts had to be removed from the SSPX website, but I should run a program on the website to make sure all mention is gone. Also, I was told point blank by Fr. Duvergier that if someone were to ask me why there is no longer any mention of Fr. Roberts on the site, then I'm to tell them I know nothing. Yes, a Catholic who runs a website is supposed to "know nothing" about his website?
Not everyone has this mentality within the SSPX and I'm not going to paint with a broad brush but such actions, after praying about it for months, are simply cultish.
-
<http://www.dioceseofpgh.org/sites/default/files/CanonCivilLawReview.pdf (http://www.dioceseofpgh.org/sites/default/files/CanonCivilLawReview.pdf)>
Aha! N.B.: The Diocese of Pittsburgh is too clueless to embed the date of what is apparently a periodical publication in the Web address at which they're storing it.
[....]
M. NOTICES REGARDING INDIVIDUALS PRESENTING THEMSELVES AS PRIESTS IN GOOD STANDING
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has published notices regarding priests who are not in good standing and do not possess the faculties of their diocese or religious community. Should you be contacted by them please notify the Vicar for Canonical Services immediately.
[....]
Fr. John J. Cordaro Diocese of Scranton
[....]
Mr. Andy Richardson (not ordained)
The names immediately above are unable to be shown in the 2-column format in which they originally appeared in the docuмent that's cited in the Web address above. Even were I able to show the columns in the PDF, they completely lacked any heading, so in the case of Cordaro, readers have no way to know what the right-side text "Diocese of Scranton" signifies, e.g.:
· Last diocese to issue faculties to that individual?
· By whom? (any reason to doubt the validity of his consecration?)
· Using what ordinal? (what edition or year of publication?)
Note that Cordaro is listed as a "F[athe]r". So the first-things-first question for which CathInfo readers are overdue to be provided with a docuмented answer:
· Where & when was he ordained as a priest, or otherwise installed?
· By whom?
· Using what ordinal? (what year's edition?)
Please understand that I showed Richardson's name only because he's the docuмent's only individual who is listed as not a priest (I suspect that he's otherwise completely irrelevant to this topic). Yes, I'm well aware that "(not ordained)" is the chronological opposite of "laicized".
-
Thread in response to Last Tradhican's question and reference that it is from the CI poster, White Wolf:
"I went down to the chancery office and inquired about Fr Cordaro, and was told more or less that he was some pervert associated with Shohola [...the SSJ], but no docuмentation was forthcoming. I call the district office in Elmhurst and talked to (I cannot even recall the name of that superior, the post was a revolving door at the time, and I'm not going to bother to look it up.) the superior and he told me it was a problem for the diocese. Meanwhile, the diocese told me the problem was for the FSSP to resolve.
-
I could not find the reference in "Catholic Light" (play on words for Scranton NO?) to the priest in question, but as a side note did you see the photo on page 3 of the "sisters" ???
-
I could not find the reference in "Catholic Light" (play on words for Scranton NO?) to the priest in question, but as a side note did you see the photo on page 3 of the "sisters" ???
I went to Catholic "light" (pun intended) and put Fr. Cordaro in the search box. This immediately came up, and the date is April 2017 Perhaps the Oblates of St. Joseph may have more information.
Link here: http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/notice/
HOME (http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/) / NEWS/PRESS RELEASES (http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/media/news/) / NOTICE
(http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/notice/)
Posted on: 04-13-2017 (http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/2017/04/) Posted in: News (http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/category/news/)
This notice is to inform the Christian faithful that John J. Cordaro, formerly a priest of the Oblates of Saint Joseph, was dismissed from the Oblates by their Superior General on August 8, 1989. He currently has no faculties whatsoever to minister in the Catholic Church. Because he has no faculties, he is forbidden to function as a priest in the Roman Catholic Church. Furthermore, the Catholic faithful should not receive the sacraments from Mr. Cordaro or attend his celebration of the sacraments, wherever they may be held.
-
I'm trying to finish some tasks today before rebooting to resolve a [expletives deleted!] thrash-a-thon that I'm enduring on my Internet computer, which makes it nearly impossible to successfully make even quite modest edits to a just-submitted posting, before CathInfo's timer, which is counting down on the scarce-few minutes & seconds CathInfo allows for its "Modify" operation, completely rejects my edits. Sooo, editing in haste to avoid that frustration, it happens that ummm, mistakes are made.
Arrrgh! I fouled my quoted reply's 1st bulleted list by clobbering it with my 2nd bulleted list. This is what readers should have seen as my 1st bulleted list:
[....] readers have no way to know what the right-side text "Diocese of Scranton" signifies, e.g.:
· Whereabouts last-known to USCCB?
· Last diocese known to incardinate or issue faculties to that individual?
· Diocese in which the individual was ordained as a priest, or otherwise installed?
The following bulleted list should have appeared only as the 2nd bulleted list:
[....] question for which CathInfo readers are overdue to be provided with a docuмented answer:
· Where & when was he ordained as a priest, or otherwise installed?
· By whom? (any reason to doubt the validity of the ordaining bishop's consecration?)
· Using what ordinal? (what edition or year of publication?)
This CathInfo member regrets his hasty error the CathInfo "Modify" count-down timer.
-
Fanny, is there no summary of why he was kicked out? All you posted was that he no longer has faculties. Why does he not have faculties anymore? Does the docuмent not say? If it doesn't say, are we supposed to google and come up with our own opinion? What does that solve?
No summary that I can find and rightly so. An order is not supposed to say why someone left or why someone was kicked out.
Saying that he is now "Mr." indicates he has been laicised. Laicization is generally done only for very serious crimes and generally of a moral nature.
-
I could not find the reference in "Catholic Light" (play on words for Scranton NO?) to the priest in question, but as a side note did you see the photo on page 3 of the "sisters" ???
Would you mean the photo of the large group that seems to consist of 2 nuns in habits lost amid a herd of elderly Avon ladies? :facepalm:
-
Would you mean the photo of the large group that seems to consist of 2 nuns in habits lost amid a herd of elderly Avon ladies? :facepalm:
I'll have to remember that one, Avon ladies :jester:. Very good description. And probably not one under 65. Don't they ever wonder why they do not have young women joining? Even conservative NO orders have a few postulants, particularly those that have a Latin Mass.
-
on August 8, 1989
Sounds like he's been independent for a long time. I'm sure someone knows what he's been up to for the past two and a half decades. I'd want to have more verification that he was actually laicized before officially writing him off, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case as good Traditional priests don't just pop up out of nowhere.
-
I guess OLMC will let anyone say mass.
And, just for the record, it's Cordaro, not Cadaro. I guess YouTube has a countdown editor, too. Either that or "10 year old girl productions" doesn't know how to spell.
https://youtu.be/eTvoV2prPVI
-
Wonder why he left Florida...
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.chapeloftheholyfamily.org/uploads/7/6/7/1/7671717/1-29-12.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwim3tKQtqLYAhWMJMAKHaa4BS04ChAWCCgwAg&usg=AOvVaw04Z3ggd6y25Aunogrt-Fvn
"Dismissed by the oblates of st. Joseph"
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.miamiarchdiocese.org/Atimo_s/news/Bulletin_100505.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjH0cL_tqLYAhUGzoMKHX1mA10QFgg3MAU&usg=AOvVaw1vM-SN1A49deTRwYsJGvcP
-
From an impartial observer's view, by the scattered, disjointed "evidence" posted here by the OP it appears that she has a personal issue with this Fr. Cordero.
-
First and foremost what I look for in a priest is whether he was ordained in the old rite by a bishop consecrated in the old formula, because I have serious doubts about whether those ordained by a new formula bishop are really priests. The OP mentions nothing about it, and focuses on a Novus Ordo bishop's dismissal of this priest. The fact that she mentions that the SSPX is accepted by Rome now, tells me her mindset is different than mine, that she only goes to priests or "priests" in union with Rome.
Therefore, for me, thus far this entire thread does not even answer the first question about this priest
-
Interesting theories, tradican. Wrong, but interesting.
Posting data as I find it is charity towards others, which is what more Catholics need. I have no opinion of him personally.
We must consider laicization of a priest by Rome as valid, whether it is old Rome or New Rome. Laicization is serious.
Remember SSJ? Do we not consider the laicization of Mr. Ensey as valid? Or do we allow him to continue his perversion on our sons? He is available, as I understand, if you can find him. Perhaps you would like to invite him to your chapel and be around your children? Probably not.
Fr. Tetherow, a confessed and convicted pervert, has not been laicised. Neither has Fr. Urutigoity. This tells you how serious laicization is.
Not everything out of Rome is bad and we must consider some things they do as valid or we have complete and utter chaos with rogue priests doing what they will, no one to rein them in, and no recourse for bad apples.
Being traditional Catholic is difficult. We must pick and choose our priests based on who did their ordination, was it done right, what has the priest been doing since, who are his "friends", has he any glaring problems, what is his doctrine, is he a priest, etc. Any one of which can raise a red flag and we must stop association with him. These are difficult times we live in.
-
Tetherow is not a priest either, as was announced by the diocese in 2015.
Did Fr. Pfeiffer send out a summons for all laicized pedophile priests to reportto Boston, KY? Especially any once with the SSJ
-
Interesting theories, tradican. Wrong, but interesting.
Posting data as I find it is charity towards others, which is what more Catholics need. I have no opinion of him personally.
We must consider laicization of a priest by Rome as valid, whether it is old Rome or New Rome. Laicization is serious.
Remember SSJ? Do we not consider the laicization of Mr. Ensey as valid? Or do we allow him to continue his perversion on our sons? He is available, as I understand, if you can find him. Perhaps you would like to invite him to your chapel and be around your children? Probably not.
Fr. Tetherow, a confessed and convicted pervert, has not been laicised. Neither has Fr. Urutigoity. This tells you how serious laicization is.
Not everything out of Rome is bad and we must consider some things they do as valid or we have complete and utter chaos with rogue priests doing what they will, no one to rein them in, and no recourse for bad apples.
Being traditional Catholic is difficult. We must pick and choose our priests based on who did their ordination, was it done right, what has the priest been doing since, who are his "friends", has he any glaring problems, what is his doctrine, is he a priest, etc. Any one of which can raise a red flag and we must stop association with him. These are difficult times we live in.
Many words but no questions are answered. Is he ordained in the Old Rite by an old rite consecrated bishop?
Since when can a priest be laicized by a bishop? You have shown no proof to support your claim.
Urutigoity has not been laicized precisely because he is a flaming ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ, they'd have to laicize 50% of the priesthood in South America if they did that.
-
http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/notice-regarding-dismissal-of-gabriel-tetherow/
Tetherow's notice: "Has been removed from the clerical state..."
-
http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/notice/
Cordaro's 2012 & 2017 notice: "Forbidden to function as a priest, no faculties whatsoever."
-
http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/statement-regarding-the-status-of-reverend-carlos-
urrutigoity/
Notice re: Diocese's 2014 objection to Fr. U incardination in Paraguay and commitment to reporting child sɛҳuąƖ abuse.
-
http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/notice-regarding-dismissal-of-gabriel-tetherow/
Tetherow's notice: "Has been removed from the clerical state..."
It says Tetherow is a new sacraments ordained priest, a Novus Ordo priest, and that he has been laicized by Pope Francis. That answers my two questions.
Conclusion, he may never have been a priest, being as he was "ordained" in the Vatican II church Novus Ordo ordination rite. Now he is laicized by the same Novus Ordo church, so he is not even a "priest".
-
If you want to split hairs over whether they were "priests" in the first place, you are missing the point.
They are all pedophiles.
-
People here are still using Rome or a diocese as the yardstick of acceptability. If you do, go back to the mainstream church and do penance for your disobedience and schismatic mentality. Fifty years after the second reformation called Vatican 2, it is surprising some here still cleave to Rome .... which I regard as a fancy gαy club with some priceless works of art.
Fr Cordaro may look like a Mexican bandit in hiding but his simple sermon is spot on about the modern representation of Christmas without Christ. Today's clergymen regard Christmas as a metaphor for 'peace and tolerance', avoiding its real meaning. Father looks like a real priest. Do I need to see spurious pieces of paper saying he is one? I am done with pieces of paper.
-
Did Fr. Pfeiffer send out a summons for all laicized pedophile priests to reportto Boston, KY? Especially any once with the SSJ
Looks that way, doesn't It?
Why do those seminarians stay? Don't they realize they are ruining their reputations?
-
It says Tetherow is a new sacraments ordained priest, a Novus Ordo priest, and that he has been laicized by Pope Francis. That answers my two questions.
Conclusion, he may never have been a priest, being as he was "ordained" in the Vatican II church Novus Ordo ordination rite. Now he is laicized by the same Novus Ordo church, so he is not even a "priest".
A priest of the new rite MAY be a legitimate priest. We don't know for sure, unless you're some version of sedevecanti. Even if he was legitimately ordained and became "father", he was laicised and, therefore, cannot function as a priest any longer.
So, it doesn't matter at this point whether or not he was a legitimate priest because he is not now.
-
If you want to split hairs over whether they were "priests" in the first place, you are missing the point.
They are all pedophiles.
You are exactly right. Pedophile or pervert priests are to be forbidden from any public priestly function. Because Rome is nuts, who enforces that in the traditional world? Bishops. If the bishops fail or if we're talking about a rogue priest, the duty falls to the laity, unfortunately.
Laicised priests are no longer priests, whether or not they ever were, and are forbidden from not only any priestly function, but from dressing as a priest or presenting themselves as priests.
Remember, though, that although laicised, Holy Orders, if ever received properly, cannot be removed.
These are very strange times we live in.
-
People here are still using Rome or a diocese as the yardstick of acceptability. If you do, go back to the mainstream church and do penance for your disobedience and schismatic mentality. Fifty years after the second reformation called Vatican 2, it is surprising some here still cleave to Rome .... which I regard as a fancy gαy club with some priceless works of art.
Fr Cordaro may look like a Mexican bandit in hiding but his simple sermon is spot on about the modern representation of Christmas without Christ. Today's clergymen regard Christmas as a metaphor for 'peace and tolerance', avoiding its real meaning. Father looks like a real priest. Do I need to see spurious pieces of paper saying he is one? I am done with pieces of paper.
You are in danger of losing your faith.
Rome is not a yardstick of acceptability, but when something correct comes out of it, we should be thankful. Laicization is one of those things, for only rome can laicise a priest.
Fr. Urutigoity, Mr. Ensey, and Mr. Tetherow, I am sure, sound very Catholic from the pulpit. For two of them, priests they are not. But they ARE all good salesmen.
Just because someone walks like a priest and talks like a priest does not mean he IS a priest. I caution you.
-
People here are still using Rome or a diocese as the yardstick of acceptability. If you do, go back to the mainstream church and do penance for your disobedience and schismatic mentality. Fifty years after the second reformation called Vatican 2, it is surprising some here still cleave to Rome .... which I regard as a fancy gαy club with some priceless works of art.
Fr Cordaro may look like a Mexican bandit in hiding but his simple sermon is spot on about the modern representation of Christmas without Christ. Today's clergymen regard Christmas as a metaphor for 'peace and tolerance', avoiding its real meaning. Father looks like a real priest. Do I need to see spurious pieces of paper saying he is one? I am done with pieces of paper.
Don't care what he looks like or what kind of sermon he gives. Couldn't care less what he thinks of VII or the New Mass. Couldn't care less what Rome thinks. I care that he's a known pedophile, and there should be no stink of homos/pedos in tradition. We're not that desperate for a "good sermon." Or his Mass.
-
If you want to split hairs over whether they were "priests" in the first place, you are missing the point.
They are all pedophiles.
Where does it say Cordera is a pedophile I missed that. Why didn't she say that in the first place?
-
Where does it say Cordera is a pedophile I missed that. Why didn't she say that in the first place?
I don't know if he is one or not. That is why I didn't say it.
I don't know why he was kicked out of his order. I don't know why the diocese calls him "Mr.", except the only justification is that he was laicised.
I DO know that he is good friends with pervert priests. And i also know that, generally speaking, the only reason priests are laicised since vat II is if it is moral in nature.
Better to stay away.
-
Pure emotionalism, the OP does not know if the person was laicized, does not know why he is called Mr., only knows to stay away.
I'm out of this one.
-
I don't care why. "he is forbidden to function as a priest in the Roman Catholic Church." He is forbidden means he is forbidden. It means he was laicised. It does not mean he can continue to dress as and present himself as a legitimate priest. His sacraments to the faithful are not legitimate.
-
Again, for those who cannot read, Fr. Cordaro was not only removed from the Oblates of St. Joseph in 1989, but the diocese of Scranton also said that he is forbidden to perform the functions of a priest. And yet, he is saying mass in KY. Now, whether Fr/Mr was re-ordained is necessary for the wise to prove before considering going to any of his masses. Has he received faculties from a Traditional bishop? If anyone knows, please post the information.
I'm not interested in beating a dead horse, or muddy anyone's name, I want facts, in order to assist others who are asking or may be confused.
-
The people willing to look to excuse these priests is bizarre. Right-thinking Catholics know to flee from this filth. What part has Christ with Belial? Even if Belial says he loves the Latin Mass and hates VII? Wake up!
-
The people willing to look to excuse these priests is bizarre. Right-thinking Catholics know to flee from this filth. What part has Christ with Belial? Even if Belial says he loves the Latin Mass and hates VII? Wake up!
I see no one making excuses for those priests. What I do see is inept communication from those posting the warning. I am totally unbiased in this. The information on other threads about Fr. Roberts is very complete. The information on Titherow is also complete. It is the information here on Cordera which is inept. Get your act together and put it all in one new OP.
Is the guy a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ, he is to be avoided. Give a clear warning.
People here do not care if a Novus Ordo bishop or Bergolio tells us to avoid a trad priest, that is not enough, as all the Novus Ordo bishops and Bergolio are not Catholics orthodox in belief and it is they that we avoid.
-
Is the guy a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ, he is to be avoided. Give a clear warning.
People here do not care if a Novus Ordo bishop or Bergolio tells us to avoid a trad priest, that is not enough, as all the Novus Ordo bishops and Bergolio are not Catholics orthodox in belief and it is they that we avoid.
Unless you are some version of sedevecanti, you can't reject everything coming out Rome because not all of it is bad.
The only reason to avoid a priest is if he is a pervert? I can think of many other reasons as well. Consider that even though urrutigoity is a definite pervert, he has not been laicised. How bad does one have to be to be laicised??? Pretty bad...
And to have a "Good friend" be tetherow?
In my book, those are enough to want to stay away. I would not risk my soul or my children to such a man.
Do what you will.
-
Urrutigoity is a definite pervert, he has not been laicised. How bad does one have to be to be laicised???
Wrong conclusion.
Urritigoity has not been laicized, along with hundreds of thousand other ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ priests, because they are all protected by the "pink mafia", the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ bishops and hierarchy. The fact that Cordera has been laicized and Urritigoity, who has a MUCH longer trail of deviant activity, has not, does not necessarily mean Cordera is worse than Urritigoity or the other hundreds of thousand ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ priests.
No ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ should be a priest, not a one.
-
Unless you are some version of sedevecanti, you can't reject everything coming out Rome because not all of it is bad.
Rat poison is 99.99% nutritious food.
-
No ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ should be a priest, not a one.
Couldn't agree with you more.
-
Rat poison is 99.99% nutritious food.
Not the rat poison I use.
It's mostly gmo corn.
He is a good friend of tetherow and he has been laicised. That's enough for me.
-
I live in the Diocese of Scranton. I still get the Catholic "Lite" due to our time in the NO.
The Diocese of Scranton is two things: a cesspool for pedophile priests AND a cesspool of corruption.
I know for a 100% fact that many good, traditional, and honest priests are run out, and yes, laicized for nothing immoral at all.
I know personally two priests who have been laicized for doing absolutely nothing wrong. Nothing.
In fact, my husband, who is a mental health counselor, was hired by one such priest to do an independent mental health evaluation because he had been found by the Bishops council to be mentally unfit. His mental illness, in case you wonder, was believing that Our Lady of Fatima indeed predicted a chastisement, that the chastisement may well be upon us, and because he was found to be "prepping" for such chastisement. This is a true story. The priest was run out of the diocese completely. He wished to remain a priest but he was laicized and all faculties removed. He attempted to seek refuge with the SSPX but was refused because he had student loan debt. Last I heard he was living with family members out west.
Another priest was laicized for being a whistle blower. That is also a true story. I know this man personally. He is not a creepo, nor a pedophile. He simply could not tolerate the corruption he saw in the diocese and wherever they sent him, he reported it. So they accused him of financial impropriety or something, decided he was mentally unfit, and wham, laicized.
So I don't know what Fr. Cordaro was laicized. It could be simply that he was offering traditional Masses. I know that, for awhile, he was offering them somewhere because ALWAYS the Catholic "Lite" reminded us of Fr. Cordaro and warned us that the SSPX was in schism. Always together. This was around 2004 or 2005.
I also know for 100% fact that there are priests in the Diocese that are disgusting pervs and have been prosecuted that STILL prey on unsuspecting families. The Diocese is full of those as well.
BUT unless someone knows the circuмstances of Father Cordaro it is HIGHLY inappropriate to scandalize him in this manner. I don't know his issue, but I will find out.
I know he was also in Florida. I know, also, that he was a friend of Fr. Wickens and tried desperately to keep his chapel in New Jersey in the hands of the faithful.
-
I live in the Diocese of Scranton. I still get the Catholic "Lite" due to our time in the NO.
The Diocese of Scranton is two things: a cesspool for pedophile priests AND a cesspool of corruption.
I know for a 100% fact that many good, traditional, and honest priests are run out, and yes, laicized for nothing immoral at all.
I know personally two priests who have been laicized for doing absolutely nothing wrong. Nothing.
In fact, my husband, who is a mental health counselor, was hired by one such priest to do an independent mental health evaluation because he had been found by the Bishops council to be mentally unfit. His mental illness, in case you wonder, was believing that Our Lady of Fatima indeed predicted a chastisement, that the chastisement may well be upon us, and because he was found to be "prepping" for such chastisement. This is a true story. The priest was run out of the diocese completely. He wished to remain a priest but he was laicized and all faculties removed. He attempted to seek refuge with the SSPX but was refused because he had student loan debt. Last I heard he was living with family members out west.
Another priest was laicized for being a whistle blower. That is also a true story. I know this man personally. He is not a creepo, nor a pedophile. He simply could not tolerate the corruption he saw in the diocese and wherever they sent him, he reported it. So they accused him of financial impropriety or something, decided he was mentally unfit, and wham, laicized.
So I don't know what Fr. Cordaro was laicized. It could be simply that he was offering traditional Masses. I know that, for awhile, he was offering them somewhere because ALWAYS the Catholic "Lite" reminded us of Fr. Cordaro and warned us that the SSPX was in schism. Always together. This was around 2004 or 2005.
I also know for 100% fact that there are priests in the Diocese that are disgusting pervs and have been prosecuted that STILL prey on unsuspecting families. The Diocese is full of those as well.
BUT unless someone knows the circuмstances of Father Cordaro it is HIGHLY inappropriate to scandalize him in this manner. I don't know his issue, but I will find out.
I know he was also in Florida. I know, also, that he was a friend of Fr. Wickens and tried desperately to keep his chapel in New Jersey in the hands of the faithful.
Somewhat related:
http://sodalitium-pianum.com/romes-new-secret-weapon/
-
Somewhat related:
http://sodalitium-pianum.com/romes-new-secret-weapon/
From the article, and this applies to Fr. Cordera, as no one on this thread has brought forward any proof that he is a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ:
The Problem:
What the whole traditional Catholic world seemed to miss, however, was that according to the new legislation, any priest who converted from conciliarism to traditional Catholicism, and desired to join a traditional community (e.g., SSPX) now faced eventual and inevitable laicization from his diocesan bishop, since in every instance (barring death), all such priests would eventually be considered to have abandoned their public ministry for “a period of more than five consecutive years,” thereby triggering the application of the censure.
Checkmate.
Consequently, since 2009, a double-edged sword has dangled precariously over the head of any priest considering converting to Tradition: If he leaves, he will eventually become subject to laicization after 5 years in Tradition. More than this, the unthinking public will naturally presume the laicization to have been for grave moral crimes (sex abuse, etc), rather than a conversion to Tradition.
Conversely, real and true degenerates can make the opposite argument: They are falsely accused of grave moral misdemeanors as persecution for their conversion to Tradition!
-
From the article, and this applies to Fr. Cordera, as no one on this thread has brought forward any proof that he is a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ:
No one said he's a pervert.
What was said is that he was kicked out of his order and laicised in 1989, and the warnings from the diocese continue to this day.
It was also said that he is "good friends" with Mr. Tetherow, a confessed and convicted child pornographer.
For him to do his own little thing in Scranton, in his own home, is one thing. For him to be brought to a seminary is quite another.
If I find anything else about him I will post it.
-
No one said he's a pervert.
What was said is that he was kicked out of his order and laicised in 1989, and the warnings from the diocese continue to this day.
It was also said that he is "good friends" with Mr. Tetherow, a confessed and convicted child pornographer.
For him to do his own little thing in Scranton, in his own home, is one thing. For him to be brought to a seminary is quite another.
If I find anything else about him I will post it.
But what you are doing is attaching something immoral to Father Cordaro's status in the Diocese of Scranton. As I pointed out, very clearly, the Diocese has a long recorded habit of liacizing priests that have done nothing immoral but are traditional priests.
He may very well be good friends with Mr. Tetherow. It is my understanding that Mr. Tetherow is quite an adept liar and very charismatic. He has duped a great number of people, including some very honest and trusting traditional priests. I know of at least 2 traditional priests that are not pedos in anyway that have been misled by Mr. Tetherow. That Fr. Cordaro is friends with Mr. Tetherow doesn't mean very much to me, at this point. Mr. Tetherow has convinced a great number of people that he was wrongly convicted and evidence was planted. Honest people often believe him. Not saying, that I do, or taking up for Tetherow, but simply pointing out that he is evil enough to convince good men of his innocence. Simply because someone is "friends" with him, doesn't make them also a pedophile.
I have no personal knowledge of Father Cordaro, only what I have heard from others who do know him and what information I have been able to gather over the years from the Diocese.
Unless you have some real evidence that Father Cordaro is indeed a pedophile or that he actually did something immoral to merit laicization, then you are quite guilty of rash judgment.
While I agree that whatever is going on in Kentucky is unfortunate, a priest deserves the benefit of the doubt unless proven otherwise.
To drag Father Cordaro's name through the mud, accuse him of not being a priest, or to question his motives is uncharitable and wrong.
If the ONLY evidence you have is that the Diocese of Scranton laicized him in 1989 and he was associated with the rotten priests from Scranton, that is no evidence at all. Scranton laicizes priests all the time. It doesn't mean he did anything wrong and it doesn't mean that the laicization was just.
-
No one said he's a pervert.
What was said is that he was kicked out of his order and laicised in 1989, and the warnings from the diocese continue to this day.
It was also said that he is "good friends" with Mr. Tetherow, a confessed and convicted child pornographer.
For him to do his own little thing in Scranton, in his own home, is one thing. For him to be brought to a seminary is quite another.
If I find anything else about him I will post it.
Agreed.
Shouldn't Cordaro have the sense to not associate with pedo priests if he isn't one?
-
Agreed.
Shouldn't Cordaro have the sense to not associate with pedo priests if he isn't one?
Both you and Fanny are committing the sin of detraction with this thread about Cordero. Unless you two bring forward proof of why he was laicized, this whole thread is garbage.
-
Both you and Fanny are committing the sin of detraction with this thread about Cordero. Unless you two bring forward proof of why he was laicized, this whole thread is garbage.
You are wrong.
If you would support a seminary who allows a laicised priest who is good friends with a confessed and convicted pervert to say mass on seminary grounds, that is up to you.
However, presenting truth so others can evaluate whether or not they want to support such is called charity, not detraction.
-
Both you and Fanny are committing the sin of detraction with this thread about Cordero. Unless you two bring forward proof of why he was laicized, this whole thread is garbage.
Exactly!
Father Cordaro was a priest of the Oblates of St. Joseph. He was removed in 1989. 20 years earlier, in 1969, he was giving speeches and working on recruitment to the seminary. He was in a lot of papers in the Diocese. His family is from Scranton. In fact, his brother passed away in 2015.
Why was he dismissed in 1989? Good question. I know a priest was dismissed from the Oblates because he was caught converting people on their death beds and offering traditional Masses.
As far as I know, since Father Cordaro was laicized in 1989, he wouldn't have been associated with the Society of St. John as they were not formed until 1997 and they were watched over by the creepo Bishop Timlin.
The were a multitude of problems with the Society of St. John, including financial matters, as well as accusations of sɛҳuąƖ assault by several students mostly accusing Ensey and Urrutigoity. I don't believe that Father Cordaro was associated with them at the time, unless he was asked to come there an offer Masses. When the Society of St. John was suppressed, it would have been possible to laicize all the priests associated with it, but I don't think Bishop Martino did that.
Subsequently, Bishop Martino, who was actually a friend to tradition, was put under so much pressure by liberal lay people and priests, that he had a mental break down and locked himself in his office just to find some peace. He was practically forced to resign because the Catholics of this Diocese hated him so much.
Unless someone can identify that Father Cordaro was named in any suits of sɛҳuąƖ misconduct, drug abuse, or theft, I don't think it's appropriate to accuse a priest of something he didn't do.
Since Novus Ordo orders aren't valid, why is anyone concerned that a priest was liacized, unless it has to do with pedophilia or ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity?
Father Cordaro may be a different story. He may have been ordained before the changes were made.
-
You are wrong.
If you would support a seminary who allows a laicised priest who is good friends with a confessed and convicted pervert to say mass on seminary grounds, that is up to you.
However, presenting truth so others can evaluate whether or not they want to support such is called charity, not detraction.
Madam, you should refrain from posting altogether, you have no common sense, or coherence in your analysis and conclusions. Let your husband do the talking, I am sure he has already told you that.
-
Madam, you should refrain from posting altogether, you have no common sense, or coherence in your analysis and conclusions. Let your husband do the talking, I am sure he has already told you that.
You are a bully.
Cordaro is a good friend of tetherow and he has been laicised. That's enough for me.
-
You are starting to sound like a parrot!
-
Since Novus Ordo orders aren't valid, why is anyone concerned that a priest was liacized, unless it has to do with pedophilia or ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity?
This is my question. Do we really have a solid number of Resistance supporters who are going to accept a priest ordained in the Novus Ordo who hasn't been conditionally ordained? He could be very traditional with a spotless record and I'd still be wondering if he's been properly ordained in the first place.
If he truly wants to join / support the Resistance, there are a number of bishops he could approach for conditional ordination.
-
This is my question. Do we really have a solid number of Resistance supporters who are going to accept a priest ordained in the Novus Ordo who hasn't been conditionally ordained? He could be very traditional with a spotless record and I'd still be wondering if he's been properly ordained in the first place.
If he truly wants to join / support the Resistance, there are a number of bishops he could approach for conditional ordination.
Has Father Paul Kramer been conditionally re ordained since he joined the Resistance community in Cebu?
-
Has Father Paul Kramer been conditionally re ordained since he joined the Resistance community in Cebu?
That I do not know, but I do remember listening to Fr. Hesse, say that when he brought up the subject (years ago) to the attention of Bishop, Fellay, Williamson and Tissier; all three said it (re-ordination) was not necessary. (Note, Fr. Hesse, Kramer and Gruner all studied together and got ordained around the same time , although I do not recall if they got ordained by the same bishop).
Also of note, Fr. Kramer was helping the SSPX in the Philippines many years before 2012 and it did not seem to be an issue then.
-
That I do not know, but I do remember listening to Fr. Hesse, say that when he brought up the subject (years ago) to the attention of Bishop, Fellay, Williamson and Tissier; all three said it (re-ordination) was not necessary. (Note, Fr. Hesse, Kramer and Gruner all studied together and got ordained around the same time , although I do not recall if they got ordained by the same bishop).
Also of note, Fr. Kramer was helping the SSPX in the Philippines many years before 2012 and it did not seem to be an issue then
Would it have been an issue for Archbishop Lefevbre ? I thought all novos ordo 'priests' in Mgr Lefevbre's FSSPX were conditionally reordained, and assumed that the Resistance would do the same. I wouldn't attend the mass of Paul VI ordained 'priest' or of any other valid priest who share the same tabernacle where one might receive Holy Communion from hosts 'consecrated' by a unproperly ordained minister.
-
I also will not receive what may, or may not, be Holy Communion from a priest not properly ordained in the traditional rite (by a certainly validly consecrated bishop), and that would include Fr. Kramer/Hesse/Gruner.
-
if a priest is kicked out if his order he is not generally laicised.
Laicization is punishment for something really bad and generally of a moral nature.
My opinion does not matter. And I am not asking anyone to believe anything. Read the facts and determine for yourselves.
Fanny,
Laicized in a catholic dictionary means a priest is reduced to a lay state by the pope. Only a pope can laicize a priest. A ordinary bishop cannot.
In the OP, those two excerpts mention the removal of Father Cordaro from his order and not to function as a priest in the diocese of scranton, and in other jurisdictions without the permission of another bishop - the priest was dismissed, no faculties, forbidden to exercise, prohibition, not in good standing.
For the diocese to use these other words as they did forbidden to function as a priest in the Roman Catholic Church is an abuse of terms to communicate to the faithful. Just as they used the abbreviation MR.
This is the same tactic the NO bishops use against all those priests in tradition who do not agree with their modernism. Pure fear mongering insulting their people not to know the difference.
-
I contacted the oblates where Mr. Cordaro used to be. This was their reply:
These notices [in the diocese bulletin] were issued due to his reported strange behavior causing concern of his overall mental and emotional state of mind.
I am aware of an accusation that was reported by a diocese in Vermont alleging that John Cordaro had inappropriate contact with a minor. I am unable to confirm if anything came out of that case.
Therefore, in light of these serious concerns by both church and civil officials, I respectfully request that your sons NOT be alone in the company of this man or to have any affiliation with him whatsoever. Because of past allegations, prudence tells us that you must refrain from any and all association with him.
---------
Here is a side oddity:
Photo of Mr. Cordaro sometime around July of 2016 when those trump/pence signs went up. Note he is in a NO black suit, not the traditional habit he wore in KY recently.
Why would he be in a suit then and a traditional habit now, just one and a half years later?
http://refilmery.com/photography/newscorp/attachment/father-john-cordaro-at-his-home-in-scranton-pa-photo-by-david-joshua-ford/
-
I contacted the oblates where Mr. Cordaro used to be. This was their reply:
These notices [in the diocese bulletin] were issued due to his reported strange behavior causing concern of his overall mental and emotional state of mind.
I am aware of an accusation that was reported by a diocese in Vermont alleging that John Cordaro had inappropriate contact with a minor. I am unable to confirm if anything came out of that case.
Therefore, in light of these serious concerns by both church and civil officials, I respectfully request that your sons NOT be alone in the company of this man or to have any affiliation with him whatsoever. Because of past allegations, prudence tells us that you must refrain from any and all association with him.
And there it is, straight from his Orders' mouth:
"Inappropriate contact with a minor."
That's it, end of story.
Anyone who supports Fr. Pfeiffer and his pedos are out of their minds.
Also, Fr. Cordaro is connected to Bp. Ambrose Moran.
Wake up, people!
-
The pattern of recklessness with those they are charged to shepherd and the total lack of performance of due diligence on the part of Fr. Hewko and Fr. Pfeiffer should serve as fair warning to all right-minded individuals
-
The pattern of recklessness with those they are charged to shepherd and the total lack of performance of due diligence on the part of Fr. Hewko and Fr. Pfeiffer should serve as fair warning to all right-minded individuals
You are so right.