Brickbats From An "Order of St. John" (OSJ) Director

and a timely update on the file

"Oh What A Web They Weave..."

by F. John Loughnan

"Qui mange le Pape, meurt!" ["Who eats the Pope, dies!"]

[An old French proverb]

"At least the Sedevacantists are consistent. They simply say that the conciliar and post-consiliar Popes were and are heretics, thus they possess no authority to teach anything in the name of the Catholic Faith, and then they go and set up their 'independent' 'churches', elect their own 'popes' often enough (some 13 or more now), and then begin calling each other heretics, and get on with it. But those who say---all the more deceptively---- 'No, we are not sedevacantists,' but who in fact thrive on constant opposition to the successor to Peter, the 'Rock' to whom Our Lord gave the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, and the promise of absolute indefectibility, these have even less credibility, if that were possible... it is a truism that every heretic thinks the Pope is a heretic, and every schismatic thinks the Pope has departed from the Deposit of Faith and that they are the only believers left. This is as old as the Church herself. In every generation there are those who march resolutely toward that deadly precipice."1
The following extracts are from an exchange initiated by a gentleman who did not identify himself beyond his name and e-mail address: Rick Cox, rcbooks@wingnet.net  His words are in red; mine in purple:



"Hi there,

I read what you posted about John Brindle.

I don't know him, but (based on what I get from you) I like him.

Attached is a photo of the current pope.  I can tell that you are a great admirer of this man so I am sure that you will like the photo of him kissing the Koran.   After all, what can a grand apostate like JPII find to argue against a grand heretic like Mohammed?"  View Attachment 1 - for the full exchange.



Don't get this wrong: I do not just like or dislike John Brindle (as a person); I love his soul (as I love your soul) and seek the "best" for your souls in eternity.

There was no need to send the attachment (I do not activate attachments from strangers - no offence intended), I have viewed it already. You will have already noted, I guess, that I have posted on my site two of the "objectionable" pics of Pope John Paul II - the "Mark of Shiva" and "New Guinea" pics! I am used to "pics"! I hope that you have a better reason to offer Our Lord Jesus Christ than the one you offer to accuse and judge the pope of apostasy! If you are right, then the gates of Hell HAVE prevailed, and Jesus Christ was a conman and liar!!! Good luck, Rick!

I am well aware that there have been extremely bad men who have occupied the position at the top (and all lower levels in the Church throughout history) - murderers (as well as the murdered), pirates and thieves, conmen, rapists, adulterers, fornicators, illegitimates, simoniacs, - the list of sinners goes on and on. But, even Alexander VI (father of 10 illegitimates during his pontificate) "poped" as required by the Church and was a Vicar of Christ.

But, of course, YOUR qualifications in theology and doctrine are far greater than Pope John II's, as well as any other qualities which may be required to "pope" today. The wonder is that you have not responded to the call!!?? In any event, we must part agreeing to disagree. I place my trust in God. Obviously, you place your trust in a "Fr. Wathen" (or similar) and/or a John Brindle. Again, Good luck!

I think you viewed my site via Dave Armstrong's. Had you used his search facility and the word "Koran" you would have obtained the following results regarding a refutation of your position vis a vis the Pope and the Koran.

(For space reasons I now provide only one reference immediately below. F.J.L. May 16)
Biblical Evidence for Catholicism search results
Found 11 items, now showing 1 - 10 search tips   site map
<< Prev  |  Next       New Refine Web

1. Dialogue: Should the Pope Kiss The Koran?:
Ecumenism as an Effort to Acknowledge? Is this diplomatic gesture by the pope prohibited by Catholic principles, and scandalous to the faithful? Two Catholic apologists cordially discuss this matter and some of its larg...



"I do not claim that John Paul II is not the pope.  I claim that he is an apostate, a heretic, a bad pope, and a bad man. [Emphasis added by F.J.L.]

Whatever HIS abilities are in theology as compared to MINE are not germane to the issue.  Lucifer is also a better theologian than I am.

Even the infamous Alexander VI was orthodox in his teaching. (F.J.L. Comment: Um, that was my point above, Rick!)

JPII's apostasy does not mean that the Gates of Hell have prevailed, but it may be an indication that Satan has been unchained.

It is nothing but foolishness to follow a pope into Hell just because he is the pope.  This thinking is along the same lines as jingoists who say "my country right or wrong, but right or wrong my country".

However, I do believe in and practice the religion of the popes -- all of the popes up to John XXIII.  As far as I know, they all TAUGHT the religion of Jesus of Nazareth.  That is not to say that they all made a good practice of it, but (at least) they TAUGHT it.

Furthermore, they did not replace the Holy Mass with a damnable sacrilegious insult to Our Lord and pretend that it is a real Mass.

This New Conciliar Religion is not Catholicism.  Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear knows that.  If YOU had a Catholic education in your youth, YOU know it.

A final point that I would like to make is that I do not place my "trust" in a particular person (i.e. John Brindle, Fr. Wathen, "or similar", etc.). These men are not responsible for my thinking or my words.  Do you really think that a person who disagrees with you must be a blind follower of some blind leader?  I resent your arrogance and your self righteousness.  That very air is why I impulsively sent you that smart-acre e-mail last night.

Perhaps now you will want to post a 'Rick Cox is a jerk' page on your O so pious website."

Consider:



Here are some comments on Rick Cox's stated claims:

1. Pope John Paul II is "a grand apostate." [1st e-mail];
Comment: A definition of "Apostasy" is provided in the 1885 Catholic Dictionary2
"It is of three kinds: that from the Christian faith; that from ecclesiastical obedience; and that from a religious profession, or from holy orders. An apostate from the Faith is one who wholly abandons the faith of Christ, and joins himself to some other law, such as Judaism, Islam, Paganism, etc. It is a mistake, therefore, to brand as apostasy any kind of heresy or schism, however criminal or absurd, which still assumes to itself the Christian name. While the Turks were in the heyday of their power, and had great command over the Mediterranean, the captivity of Christians among them, and apostasy resulting from such captivity, were matters of everyday occurrence; hence a great number of decisions and opinions respecting the treatment of apostates, on their wishing to return to Christianity, may be found in the writings of canonists. The second kind of apostasy, is when a Catholic wilfully and contumaciously sets at nought the authority of the Church. Such apostasy, if persisted in, becomes Schism. The third kind is that of those who abandon without permission the religious order in which they are professed, as when Luther abandoned his profession as an Augustinian, and married Catherine Bora. He is also an apostate who, after having received major orders, renounces his clerical profession, and returns to the dress and customs of the world, ‘an act which entails ecclesiastical infamy, and, if there is marriage, excommunication.’ (Ferraris, Apostasia; Mack's article in Wetzer and Welte.")

Inasmuch as none of this applied to the conciliar and post-conciliar popes, the accusation is baseless and calumnious. In fact, as the OSJites reject the authority of their local bishops, the accusation of schism might rightly be directed against them! Of course, Rick Cox has no right to accuse anyone of apostasy or heresy. I must confess that it is difficult for me to see what difference there is between hard-core Protestantism and the expressions of the OSJ/Wathenite Rick Cox and his associates.

2. Following the death of Pope Pius XII his successor changed the Roman Catholic Church and it became "John XXIII's New Age Conciliar Religion" [1st e-mail] "which is not Catholicism." [2nd e-mail];
Comment: This looks mighty like a denial of several Dogmas of the Catholic Church - the denial of just one equates to the denial of all. As I do not have any right to declare anyone a heretic or apostate, I simply suggest that Rick Cox and Co. wash out their mouths, and then keep their opinions to themselves.

3. Despite the Roman Catholic Church ceasing (for Rick Cox) a visible existence in the Vatican - it being the "New Age Conciliar Religion" - Rick states that he does "not claim that John Paul II is not the pope." No, he says, "he is an apostate, a heretic, a bad pope, and a bad man." [2nd e-mail]; it really would be lovely to compare the credentials and qualifications of Rick Cox and Pope John Paul II to see just who could reasonably make such a statement!!!
Comment: First, Rick acknowledges Pope John Paul IS pope, but then he CANNOT be pope - for he is "an apostate, a heretic, a bad pope". Hang on! Earlier on, he claimed, effectively, that the true Roman Catholic Church had become invisible and was replaced by a bogus organization, the New Age Conciliar Religion. Does Rick mean that Pope John Paul II (who was elected in conclave) is apostate from the New Conciliar Religion? Please go to the next item:

4. "Lucifer is a better theologian than I am." [2nd e-mail];
Comment: In as much as Lucifer was the universe's WORST theologian (he thought he was equal to God!!!) - this really does not say anything good about Rick's alleged theological speculations, does it?!

5. Notwithstanding the fact (according to Rick) that there has not been an effectively "REAL" Pope in the Roman Catholic Church since the elevation of John XXIII on Oct. 28, 1958, "JPII's apostasy does not mean that the Gates of Hell have prevailed..." [2nd e-mail];
Comment: It is evident that Rick Cox is unaware of the meaning of "apostasy":
"Apostasy from the Faith is the act by which a baptized person, after possessing the true Christian faith, totally rejects it."3

In speaking of Satan's attempts to "sift" Peter, Our Lord set no time limits on the effect of His counter-actions; His promise was for the duration of the Church. Again, we appear to have a denial of several Dogmas of the Catholic Church by these people; see above.

6. "...but it may be an indication that Satan has been unchained." [2nd e-mail];
Apparently Rick has no faith in the alleged vision received by Pope Leo XIII, the result of which was the institution of the Prayer to St Michael the Archangel at the end of the Tridentine Rite Mass!

7. "... all of the popes up to John XXIII...TAUGHT the religion of Jesus of Nazareth..." [2nd e-mail];
Excuse me, but wasn't the religion of Jesus of Nazareth (for at least a part of His life) the Mosaic Law? Didn't He teach in the Judean's Temple? His disciples also? For some considerable time after Christ's death His followers were called "Nazareans", and later: "Christians". What Rick probably means to say is "... all of the popes up to John XXIII...TAUGHT the Christian religion...", which was founded and established by Our Lord, Jesus Christ.

But, let us see whether "all of the popes up to John XXIII...TAUGHT the religion of Jesus of Nazareth...": - or even the Christian religion all the time:    View Attachment 2 - List of some interesting papal opinions

That will have to do for the time being. I think it is sufficient to show that Rick Cox's allegation that he follows the teachings of the popes up to (but excluding Bl. Pope John XXIII) is utterly puerile. Personally, I think that he (and the other OSJ/Wathenites) should do a radical re-evaluation of their position.


Another simple example of the ridiculous nature of their position is to take a look at the Dogmas of the Catholic Church. Were ALL of these taught as the "religion of Jesus" at the time Jesus walked this earth? But, a Catholic is obliged to hold them and not deny any one of them; else he is not a Catholic!

8. "Furthermore, they did not replace the Holy Mass with a damnable sacrilegious insult to Our Lord and pretend that it is a real Mass." [2nd e-mail];
And, neither did the post-conciliar Popes!! Pope John Paul II is a validly elected Pope and acclaimed so by faithful Catholics. The same with Pope Paul VI. As the Mass touched Faith and Morals, the promulgation of the Mass involved Infallibility. Whether you LIKE it or not - the Mass is the Mass is the Mass irrespective of the liturgy that surrounds it. The Novus Ordo contains the essentials: an Offertory, a Consecration (This is My Body and This is My Blood being the requirement for transubstantiation), and the Priests Communion. The rest is dressing.

9. "John Brindle, Fr. Wathen...are not responsible for my thinking or my words." [2nd e-mail];
Despite what he "says", Rick appears to rely on a former Roman Catholic Priest's take on the matter. But, perhaps I am wrong? Could the orientation be from another Kentuckian source? I remember a rag out of Louisville, Ky called "Veritas" which bad-mouthed Pope Paul VI back in the 1970's as THE ANTICHRIST - "Paul 666" Quite obviously, Paul VI is now dead a long time, and THE Antichrist is still to come, and we know not the day or the hour. But, just as there have always been false Christs throughout the history of the Church, so too has "Veritas" proven to be a false Christ; and, by their fruits, the same applies to the OSJ/Wathenites.

"...if it was not "...Fr. Wathen...[who was] responsible..." then who could be the responsible party? Well, perhaps it could be any of the following:

Veritas (which was later promoted by Jim McNally); and
Patrick Henry Omlor - originally from the USA, but then resident in Perth, Australia; and
Hutton Gibson - also an American who made his home in Australia. Both would become sedevacantists. I remember them both; some twenty years ago, when Gibson was National Secretary of the Australian Latin Mass Society (he was a fire-brand then too!!!), I was, for a short time, in the sinecure position of National Vice-President of the same Society.
Since those times, the sede ranks include such persons as:
John Lane (Australian), various Thucites such as
Fr. Kevin Vaillancourt (a Thucite) operator of the SEDE forum,
"Bp" Guerard des Lauriers (Thucite and principle writer of The Ottaviani Intervention under the direction of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and some of Lefebvre's priests, such as
"Bp" Daniel Dolan (Thucite), and Bp Clarence Kelly (Mendezite); and others.

I could be wrong, but, my money is on Fr. Wathen or Veritas for Rick Cox & Co.'s decline in Faith!

10. "Perhaps now you will want to post a Rick Cox is a jerk’ page on your O so pious website."
I am sorry that Rick has pre-judged himself. I would have preferred to say that, like me and every person on this earth, he is a sinner in need of salvation. If I were to call Rick a "jerk", then I would have to do a Fr. Damien and say "we jerks..."4 Please God, he sees the errors of his ways, confesses, and makes appropriate restitution. Amen.

Although Rick Cox did not introduce his interest in the matter, his bias becomes clear when visiting a page dedicated to the "management" of the "Holy Trinity Chapel of the Priory of Saint John the Apostle." The "fourth" smiling picture features "Brother Rick Cox, Well, actually, the only one smiling is Fr. James F. Wathen!



Mr Stephen Hand, co-Editor of Traditional Catholic Reflections had this to say:
A Note on Sedevacantist Patristic Citation & Exegesis
The Dominican and Jesuit fathers and saints debated their respective teachings regarding grace and predestination for centuries without the Church approving either side's positions. Likewise a very few fathers and teachers of the past---largely in the light of the Lutheran revolt--- debated whether a Pope, hypothetically, could fall into heresy. None of their contradictory opinions, however, were ever repeated or---much less---approved by the Popes and Magisterium, and thus such opinions---which, again, contradict each other--- were never in any way elevated to the level of Church doctrine; thus all such opinions---regardless of who formulated them in the past--- are mere opinions, utterly nonbinding, and, as such, cannot override the certainty of Our Lord's promises to Peter and the Church (Mt:16; 18; 20:28: Jn 14:16, 1 Tim 3:15, etc). The Holy Spirit, de fide, protects Peter's successors, and all Councils in union with and ratified by him from officially promulgating heresies and invalid sacraments; and thus Catholics are assured of the indefectibility and victory of the Church in Christ with Peter. All Sedevacantist inferences regarding this matter, based on scant and scattered hypothetical opinions of the past by way of private judgment,  are ipso facto, null and void, a priori, not having the approval of the Magisterium. See the Catholic Encylopedia on Indefectibility and on the living Magisterium. ---SHand



I take this opportunity to update the file "Oh What A Web They Weave...":

The three major webmasters who express the same opinions as Rick Cox are:

Davis Brindle of In Hoc Signo Vinces (IHSV)
John Brindle of Ecclesia Militans, (This site went "off-air" prior to Christmas 2000) and
"Charles the Hammer" Goldstein of Traditional Catholic Apologetics. (This site has re-located).

And we also have Robert V. Brindle of Our Lady of the Rosary Homeschool, and his daughter
Sherry L. Brindle, who touted for Our Lady's Heavenly Treasures.

Remember also that at the time, I made a copy of the Sacred Heart Forum membership AND corresponded with its moderator Mike Malone. It was no surprise to see the membership details include:
"militanti-@hotmail.com John Brindle active 10/03/1999" Note: the last letter of ALL members was automatically omitted from the prefix. Thus, my own entry in the membership list showed:
"jloughna-@hotmail.com".

At the time of the completion of the above file (on Dec. 24, 2000):
a) Ecclesia Militans and Traditional Catholic Apologetics were displaying pro-Order of St John [OSJ] material; None of the three are doing so as at this date, May 18, 2001. Omitted on "orders" from above???

b) Ecclesia Militans went off line prior to Christmas 2000, and is still off-line today.

c) All three sites displayed a link to the ultra racist "Traditionalist" Holy War site; apart from the "down" site, the links remain today.

Incidentally, considering that the TCA webmaster's surname is Goldstein, it is remarkable that he should promote the extreme anti-semitism displayed on Holy War! What is more, the same Goldstein links to the former Mormon, Thomas Sparks who also is rabidly anti-semitic, and who flooded the Feeneyite Sacred Heart forum with his hate filled ravings. Strange as that may be, it would be even stranger if Goldstein endorsed St Bernard of Clairvaux (who was called "The Hammer of Heretics"!!!); St. Bernard was outraged at "that Jew on the throne of Peter" (Peter Pierleoni, the anti-Pope Anacletus II [1130-1138]), and campaigned against him. Nevertheless, Anacletus II remained on the throne until his death.

"Anacletus was the great-grandson of the converted Jew Baruch-Benedict, founder of the Pierleoni family. He held the throne for eight years. For even a hundred years after the Pierleoni accepted the Cross (as converts. F.J.L.), Anacletus the last of the Pierleoni Popes, was bitterly attacked as "that Jew sitting on the throne of Peter." 5 The Oxford Dictionary of Popes states: "In contrast to that of Innocent, Anacletus' election was participated in by the whole of Rome. He lost the war of propaganda, chiefly through the efforts of Bernard of Clairvaux who didn't like Jews - even long converted Jews!"

In fact, Charles "the Hammer" Goldstein (who claims to be "THE Catholic Apologist") may well be glad that St. Bernard is enjoying his reward in Heaven, for there may be a minor parallel today:

There is an account of the life of David Goldstein at Catholic-Dispatch. Doing a rough generation estimate, it is possible (and I stress "possible") that Charles "the Hammer" is a great grand-son/nephew, or great great grand-son/nephew of David Goldstein, convert to the Faith in 1905. Of course, this is only speculation, and it does not really matter anyway; but the possibility is fascinating; and the decline would be appalling!

d) The e-mail address for "Charles the Hammer" was and remains today tradcat@centralky.com.

What is interesting is that Our Lady's Heavenly Treasures sought (and obtained on Feb. 9, 2000) an "A.B.A." rating from Petersnet. It's e-mail address (which had been tradcat@centralky.com.) recently changed to olht@centralky.com) An inspection of Petersnet's evaluation shows the following:

Sponsor: Our Lady's Heavenly Treasures
Webmaster: Robert
Email: tradcat@centralky.com
Address: 1396 Barnes Road
City: Bardstown.

How interesting!!!
Unless there is some subterfuge afloat, "Robert" is, no doubt, Robert V. Brindle, Jnr.
Both "Charles the Hammer" and "Robert" for a period possessed the SAME e-mail address tradcat@centralky.com
1396 Barnes Road, Bardstown is the address of Robert V. Brindle and members of the Brindle family and of Our Lady's Heavenly Treasures

Note: The websites In Hoc Signo Vinces, Traditional Catholic Apologetics and Our Lady's Heavenly Treasures have all had recent updates and/or new providers.

In Hoc Signo Vinces has a link to Traditional Catholics., where "Michael Wilcox Esq. OSJ" lauds the OSJ thus:

"...As time goes on there will be information on a Mass in Palmyra, Maine Offered by Father James Wathen OSJ. We have links to other Traditional Catholic Web Sites that have information on the Traditional Catholic Faith. We also have a Page of prayers, one of Fathers many radio transcripts, and a page of links to Catholic giftshops and bookstores..."
One of the entries in his Guest Book is as follows:

Name: xxxxx xxxxx
E-Mail: xxxxxxxxx@cs.com
Homepage Title: xxxx xxxxxxxx (Of course - what else!!! F.J.L.) Click For e-mail message from "Michael" onetruechurch@hotmail.com
Homepage URL: http://xxxxxxxxxxxx.homestead.com
Referred By: Just surfed On In
Location: xxxxxxxx, Indiana
Comments: I wanted to let you know about some other websites that are done by people attending a Order of Saint John Priory. My homepage (still under construction) is mentioned above. You can visit www.geocities.com/athens/troy/6480 and www.tradcatholic.centralky.com

Just how long the entry remains there is problematic, given the propensity of OSJites for covering-up.

The latter websites, of course, belong to Ecclesia Militans (presently off-line) and Traditional Catholic Apologetics, the owners of which are claimed by an OSJite to be "other" OSJ attendees.

My post to the Fidei Catholicae Forum of Jan. 17, 2000 stated:
"Again, the facts are that John Brindle slanders the popes , the bishops in union with the popes, the Roman Catholic Liturgy which is the norm for the Roman Rite of the Roman Catholic Church, declaring that (by virtue of the Novus Ordo Consecration being invalid and the Mass itself a sacrilege) the Roman Catholic clergy and laity are idolaters - receiving plain bread in lieu of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord, Jesus Christ.
I say: that I do not accept that this slander comes from a Roman Catholic who is in union with the Pope in Rome and with a Diocesan Bishop who is in union with the pope.
And, this will I defend to the best of my ability, so help me God."
In one of his posts to the Fidei Catholicae Forum John Brindle threatened me with Legal action. As a result, I have painstakingly obtained and recorded relevant evidence - in the event that I receive an all expenses paid invitation to the USA, where I would be delighted to produce an appropriate response; and to undertake a more detailed investigation. I have been saving certain matters as a reserve, but in the light of the recent website alterations I wish to record the following:

As mentioned, I have on file copied of the various website pages of these sites - including the source HTML code!!! Here is a sample of common source code used:



Extracted from Ecclesia Militans' <title> Introibo Ad Altare Dei:Main</title> page.

<!-- WDK2.0::emilitans.wdk::15:31:36::19-03-1999 --> [Emphasis added by F.J.L.]
<snip>
<snip>
<script language="javascript"><!--
if(navigator.appName == "Netscape") {
if(navigator.appVersion.charAt(0)>=4) {
document.write("<link rel='stylesheet' type='text/css' href='religion_ns.css'/>");
}
} else if
(navigator.appName == "Microsoft Internet Explorer") {
if(navigator.appVersion.charAt(0)>=4 {
document.write("<link rel='stylesheet' type='text/css' href='religion.css'/>");
}
} //--></script>
Extracted from "Robert"'s <title>Our Lady of Heavenly Treasures</title> page.

<!-- WDK2.0::emilitans.wdk::15:31:36::19-03-1999 --> [Emphasis added by F.J.L.]
<snip>
<script language="javascript"><!--
if(navigator.appName == "Netscape") {
if(navigator.appVersion.charAt(0)>=4) {
document.write("<link rel='stylesheet' type='text/css' href='religion_ns.css'/>");
}
} else if
(navigator.appName == "Microsoft Internet Explorer") {
if(navigator.appVersion.charAt(0)>=4 {
document.write("<link rel='stylesheet' type='text/css' href='religion.css'/>");
}
}
//--></script>
Note that the "Heavenly Treasures" script is an almost exact copy from "Ecclesia Militans" - indicating at least a direct connection, perhaps even that the sites were created on the same computer or network. My record of ISP "hits" from the Bardstowners show the basic 209.215.181.X - the "X" factor varying between 101, 106, 109, 111, 112, 113, 122, 113, 122, 78, 80, 81, 91, 92, 97, 99.

Not only - but also:

Remember Rick Cox repeating the old St Peter lie? You know - "I know not the man!!!"? - well, Please



To re-cap, here are some of the Bardstowners/OSJite/Wathenite claims:

Fr. James Wathen, OSJ
The "New Mass" does not involve Papal Infallibility.
The Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum of Pope Paul VI is null and void.
The Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum of Pope St. Pius V is still in effect.
The "Tridentine Mass" is the only Mass of the Latin Rite.
The "New Mass" is illegal.
The "New Mass" is immoral.
The "New Mass" is not Catholic.
The "New Mass" - if we believe the Council of Trent and official documents of the Church - is no Mass at all.
The "New Mass" is THE GREAT SACRILEGE.6

Note: The Publisher in 1971 and present seller of The Great Sacrilege is Thomas A. Nelson O.S.J., of TAN Books and Publishers.

Rick Cox
"I do not claim that John Paul II is not the pope. I claim that he is an apostate, a heretic, a bad pope, and a bad man...
I do believe in and practice the religion of the popes -- all of the popes up to John XXIII...
...they did not replace the Holy Mass with a damnable sacrilegious insult to Our Lord and pretend that it is a real Mass...
The New Conciliar Religion is not Catholicism."7

John Brindle
"I reject the Novus Ordo for several reasons, among which are the following:
1) Because it is invalid. 2) Because it is sinful to attend it. 3) because it is not conducive to piety and the honor and glory of God. 4) Because it was built on, and is an aid to, the heresy of ecumenism.", and one thing that makes it invalid?
"The new Consecration formula (i.e. 'For all') makes the Novus Ordo invalid."
"...it would be a mortal sin to attend the Novus Ordo. As far as why it would be a sin, it is because the Novus Ordo itself is a sacrilege." 8

Sheila Squires, O.S.J.
       - Sheila appears to be the wife of "Conservator: Bro. Robert Squires O.S.J."
       whose name is located at Priory of St. Athanasius. This is her testimony:
"Sheila Squires O.S.J. <ssquires@tdstelme.net>
19 Marian Dr.
Palmyra, ME 04965

URL: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Trail/1160/main.html
Additional Comments: Hello, I find your information very interesting. As a Traditional Roman Catholic, I am blessed to participate in the Traditional Latin mass, once a month, not only because of God's grace, but because He has sent us a priest, with the full authority of Holy Mother Church. Father is Chaplain of the "Order of St John". A very "Old Order", that for many years was a Military Order of Knights who, saved Christianity many times. Their greatest achievement being, defeating the Mighty Turkish Armada. At that time the Order was in Malta. Since we also, are members of the Order, we therefore need not the permission of the local Bishop. Of course the Bishop would like to say, and does so often, that we are in Schism, we most certainly are NOT! As far as I am concerned, to be in the Novus Ordo Church, is to be in a Lutheran Church!!! Which is a Heretical one! And since being a "Cradle Catholic", I know now, why we were forbidded in the 40's and 50's to set foot in a Heretical church. How can I possibly now?? I truly believe that "The faith", left to us by Jesus, passed down through the Holy Apostles, through Tradition is one that can NEVER be changed! The teachings of the church, were never, in my humble opinion, supposed to be CHANGED! And it has been the duty of each Pontiff, to keep, and Hold, to the Teachings and Traditions of the Church. They can no more change them than they can change the words of Jesus Christ. Respectfully, Sheila A." 9

Paul A. Robinson - webmaster of Our Lady of the Rosary Library
includes an earlier message from Sheila Squires:

In answer to the question:" How you found this site:" she wrote in his Guestbook:
"looking for info against Conciliar church novus ordo & indult for people." 10

Note: Sheila is from the same Palmyra, Maine as mentioned by Michael Wilcox above.

Paul includes such "Traditional Catholic" goodies as:

  • Why the New Mass is Deadly, by Bro. Michael Dimond, "O.S.B."
  • Answers on the Indult Mass, by the Thucite(?) Fr. Ronald Brown.
  • The Evils of the New Liturgy, by Paul A. Robinson
  • Directory of Latin Masses in USA and Canada, from Fr. M.E.Morrison's TRADITIO
All the above parties are a portion of so-called "Traditionalists", who routinely denigrate the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, the Bishops and clergy and laity who are in union with him, and the normative liturgy of that Church. They claim to be Catholics; some give lip-service to there actually being a pope - but he is not doing a good enough job of "poping" for them. Others say that the pope is a heretic, an apostate even (without even knowing what the word actually means!). Still others say that the seat of Peter is vacant (a situation of "sedevacantism".) Some will even go so far to claim that the last "REAL" pope was Pope St Pius X at the beginning of the last century!! It is all madness; madness. A delusion brought about by a feverish exercise of private judgement.


These so-called "Traditionalists" - the sedevacantists, the Rick Cox's, Brindles, SSPXers, OSJites would have had REAL trouble had they lived in any other periods of history and experienced some of the "good old days" papal sinners or "low lifes" such as:

Alexander VI, Boniface VII, Boniface VIII, Gregory XIII, Innocent VIII, John XXII, Julius II, Paul III, Pius II, Pius IV, Sergius III, (mistresses before or after elevation.);

Clement VII and John XII (were illegitimates);

Ss Calixtus and Zephyrinus (favoured Monarchianism);

St Marcellinus (apparently offered incense to the gods);

Liberius (signed document ambiguous as to Arianism);

St Gelasius (was friendly towards the Arian king Theodorus);

St Symmachus (actually called on the Arian king to decide WHO was to be "Peter");

St John I (interceded on behalf of the Arians persecuted by Emperor Justin I);

Honorius (encouraged the Monothelite heresy);

John XXII (preached the heresy that the souls of the saints do not have the vision of God prior to the resurrection of the body - and that there was no one yet in hell);

Gregory XIII (said it was not homocide to kill an embryo of less than 40 days since it was not human);

Leo X (pleasure loving. During his pontificate there were 7,000 registered prostitutes in Rome in a population of less than 50,000);

Nicholas III (was consigned to hell by Dante [Inferno 19, 81 ff.] because of his nepotism and avariciousness);

John XXIII [antipope] (ex-pirate, self confessed former murderer and rapist);

Gregory XIII (Boccaccio's Decameron prefaced by a papal Bull and two imprimaturs);

Benedict XV (emptied the Vatican coffers to provide humanitarian aid to the Soviet; tsk, tsk!!);

St Damasus I (hired a gang of thugs to consolidate his claim against Ursinus);

Boniface VI (had been degraded by John VIII for immorality);

Benedict IX (scandalously violent and dissolute; pope three times; sold the papal office.) etc. etc. etc.


The point is that Our Lord, Jesus Christ, seems to have provided us with examples where His servants and officers would be only TOO human in their sinful excesses - St Peter, who would deny Him; Judas, who would betray Him; Thomas, who would doubt Him; and the other Apostles who would desert Him in His greatest trial - the Crucifixion. Just as then, so too during the course of history would there be those on the Team who would be less than perfect - in fact, sinners like us.

The Church has not denied that these Popes were any less human and fallible in their private lives than were the original disciples. All of them (except the antipope) are recognized as being Popes - Christ's Vicars on earth in their time. Certainly, we do not know all the details of these popes lives, nor do we know how they finished their lives in the eyes of God. May God have mercy on us all. And may God have mercy, bless and guide the present pope, John Paul II in his pontificate.



As to Fr. James Wathen, OSJ and "The Great Sacrilege" itself, Franciscan Brother Alexis Bugnolo ended his initial critique of the latter with:

CONCLUSION

"Every substantial charge brought by Fr. Wathen against the Novus Ordo has been proved false. To summarize, Fr. Wathen claimed (1) that a Pope can teach heresy or error when promulgating a new Missal for the universal Church, (2) that a Pope cannot abrogate the Missal promulgated by Pope St. Pius V, (3) that it is a sin of sacrilege for the Pope to promulgate a new Missal which changes the Mass, since he does not have the authority to do this, (4) that the new Missal is not the true Mass because it is essentially different, (5) that the form of consecration in the new Missal is defective, and hence its celebration is invalid, (6) that the priest who offers the Novus Ordo is not provided for having a sufficient intention to make the Consecration.

But as we have seen from the teaching of the Popes, Councils, the Doctors and Saints of the Church and from approved pre-Vatican I theologians, quoted by St. Alphonsus, (1) a Pope cannot teach heresy or error when acting as a universal teacher, such as he does in promulgating a New Missal, (3) that a Pope can abrogate a Missal published by his predecessor, (4) since the Pope has the authority to change the Mass, his doing so cannot be a sin of sacrilege, (5) that the form of consecration in the New Mass is valid, since it contains all the essential words, (6) that the new Missal cannot be asserted to be defective in regard to providing for this intention since it is expressly promulgated in continuity with the former Missal.

Therefore, one can reasonably conclude that the argument of Fr. Wathen's book The Great Sacrilege is substantially false. And in as much as it denies Papal authority to issue a new Missal it teaches heresy; and in as much as it charges all those who accept the New Missal with heresy or error or sacrilege, it is calumnious."

FINAL COMMENTS

"Fr. Wathen's book proceeded, in the opinion of this author, in an heretical manner, in as much as to prove that a priest could in good conscience disagree with the promulgation of the New Missal by Pope Paul VI, he went so far as to deny Papal Authority and ignored Catholic Teaching regarding what is essential to make the Mass a True Mass. In this Fr. Wathen neglected to recognize that whereas a universal disciplinary enactment of the Roman Pontiff must necessarily be free from heresy and error—on account of Papal Infallibility and the Indefectibility of the Church—there is no guarantee that such a disciplinary measure would be the most perfect possible or would not be promulgated in such a way as to be a cause of scandal to the faithful or of abuses by the clergy. This is what occurred with the promulgation of the New Missal of Pope Paul VI. But there is, in the opinion of this author, no evidence in the external forum that Pope Paul VI intended to scandalize the faithful or to rob them of a spiritual treasure. Rather, from his writings and many talks it is clear that he hoped his enactment would bring great good to the Church.

Likewise, it must be said that with hindsight it is easier to see that the promulgation of a new Missal, which was not requested by the faithful, and which differed in liturgical symbolism, methodology, and legal praxis so much from the former Missal, would be the occasion of grave scandal to the entire Church, attached out of piety to the former Rite and pressed as it was by a world growing every more different and hostile to the Faith and Morals of Christ. The Mass was the anchor of the world, the sole anchor in the time in which Pope Paul VI changed it in so visibly a manner. To expect that the laity, who lived in the world and of necessity had to judge by appearances, would not be confused by this extensive visible transformation of the Mass, is unquestionably and undoubtedly imprudent.

Nevertheless it must be reaffirmed and remembered that none of this makes the new Missal heretical or erroneous in itself. There is a lasting belief and love of the entire Church for the former Missal, among the laity who grew up with it and the laity who never knew it; among the vocations who said it on the day of their first mass and the vocations that long some day to be permitted to do so. This undoubtedly is the work of the Holy Spirit who is a Spirit of peace and reconciliation, of unity and consolation, of truth and beauty, and most of all, of holiness.

May God grant that the Successor of St. Peter continue to foster the Traditional Roman Rite through the entire Church and in every Roman Catholic parish throughout the world. And may He similarly grant the Successors of St. Peter light, wisdom, and fortitude to improve the Missal of Pope Paul VI in such a manner as to stave off scandal among the faithful, and manifest, in accord with the wishes of the Second Vatican Council, more clearly the true nature of the Mass. "11



And as to the latter:

"It should be known that Fr. Wathen, though once a Roman Catholic priest, is no longer. The Order he claims to belong to was suppressed nearly 200 years ago, and the branch to which Fr. Wathen belongs was sustained by laymen belonging to Protestant organizations and Russian Orthodox laymen. It is entirely bogus and fraudulent. Fr. Wathen therefore has no faculties to hear confession or confect any sacrament. Any confession he hears is therefore invalid, as are his marriages. All the masses he says are sacrileges, offered as they are without episcopal mandate. Likewise are all the sacraments he confesses. "The Great Sacrilege" is therefore not the Novus Ordo Mass--though it does have its problems--but rather the author of the book by that title."12



Note, June 1, 2001:

The above (including footnotes, but not including the late-breaking info on the OSJ web-site direct connection to John Brindle's Ecclesia Militans website nor the Traditional Catholics and Our Lady of the Rosary Library websites and Robert and Sheila Squires info.) was made available to Rick Cox as per the following e-mail:

Dear Rick and friends,

Pursuant to a couple of e-mail messages from Rick Cox I have uploaded a file,
<a href="http://members.tripod.co.uk/jloughnan/bbosj.htm">   </a> to my website.

It is my intention to make the file public on June 1, 2001. Of course, I am only too happy to correct any matters of fact.

Rick's reply was:

I see that you were quite troubled by my e-mail.  You really have posted a "Rick Cox is a Jerk Page".  Amazing.

There is not one single point you make here that I could not refute or clarify.  However, I do have a life.  In other words, I don't have time for this.

I will say one thing however -- you are off track from reality with your notion that a true pope cannot be an apostate, a heretic, etc. I am not going to go into a long dissertation in an attempt to prove this to you.  An angel from Heaven could not prove it to YOU.

You seem to be such a worshiper of the pope that you will go into any and all kinds of mental gymnastics to justify what he does.  No doubt, if our next pope turns out to have the Catholic Faith, you will forsake the Novus Ordo and become a Christian again.

I have to ask, do you turn every private debate into a public attack upon your opponent?  I'm just wondering.  Do you not have anything to do?
To which I replied:

Rick Cox wrote 20 May 2001:

<<I will say one thing however -- you are off track from reality with your notion that a true pope cannot be an apostate, a heretic, etc.>>

Unfortunately, Rick displays the fact that he is unable to focus on truth or actuality! In my file

  1. - have I anywhere stated that I believe that "a true pope cannot be an apostate, a heretic, etc."?
  2. - have I anywhere stated that I believe that "a true pope" has not been actually accused of being "an apostate, a heretic, etc."?

  3. - have I anywhere stated that I believe that "a true pope has actually not been an apostate, a heretic, etc."?
  4. - have I anywhere stated that "Rick Cox is a sedevacantist"?
  5. - have I anywhere stated that "Rick Cox is a jerk"?
The answer to all questions is "NO"!

a) However, I will now state that I DO KNOW of popes who have been so accused in the past; but, I also know that "accusations" do not equate with "actuality."

Here are my notes on the subject, as forwarded to Bishop Fellay and Archbishop George Pell in "My Reason For Withdrawing Support From The Society of St Pius X (SSPX)" (Note: A number of these entries are included in my file "Brickbats From An OSJ Official". Rick cannot have actually "read" the file before making the above quoted comment!!!: View Attachment 3 here

Putting it very simply: Theologians are paid to have opinions. They can have various and contradictory opinions. They may or may not have worth. They have virtually no strength if they are not incorporated in the Dogmas of the Catholic Church - those things that MUST be believed to be a Catholic.

In any event, I believe that I am right in saying that there is no-one, repeat no-one, in the OSJ group who is capable of rendering a definitive ruling on this or any other matter of Faith; the only one who has authority is the current ruling pope and/or his proxy.

Accordingly, I am able to say with confidence that it is Rick Cox who is " off track from reality" when he states that I have a "notion that a true pope cannot be an apostate, a heretic, etc."

It IS worthy of note that (notwithstanding a claim that "there is not one single point you make here that I could not refute or clarify.") Rick Cox's only treatment of what he considers to be erroneous "matters of fact" are:

1. A missing "r" in the OSJ URL - to wit"

http://www.kornet.org/trinity/holytc.htm should be
http://www.korrnet.org/trinity/holytc.htm

and,

2. His false statement above: <<I will say one thing however -- you are off track from reality with your notion that a true pope cannot be an apostate, a heretic, etc.>> - once again showing that he had not read what was before his eyes.

b) Rick appears to be SO paranoid that he thinks that the mere mention of sedevacantism establishes the fact of one being labelled such. The quotation from Stephen Hand mentions no-one in particular. It seems that Rick has a bad conscience to go with his faulty reasoning.

In conclusion:

Let me re-arrange and add to my questions above:

Has Rick Cox anywhere:

  1. - stated that he believes that "a true pope can be an apostate, a heretic, etc."?

  2. - stated that he believes that "a true pope" has been actually accused of being "an apostate, a heretic, etc."?
  3. - stated that he believes that "a true pope has actually been an apostate, a heretic, etc."?
  4. - stated that "Rick Cox has been accused of being a sedevacantist"?
  5. - stated that I, F. John Loughnan, am a apostate? (Needing to "become a Christian again"!)
  6. - stated that I might have a comprehension difficulty?
  7. - stated that "An Angel from Heaven could not prove it (speculation on a pope being 'an apostate, a heretic, etc.') to you." (that is to John Loughnan).
  8. - stated that John Loughnan "will go into any and all kinds of mental gymnastics to justify what he does."
  9. - stated that I might be interested in who precisely is the celebrant at his schismatic liturgy?
And the answer to all these questions:

Yes





Some Final Thoughts From Steve Hand of TCR News:13

Thus saith the Integrist!

"The Pope hath broken with tradition in substantial dogmatic areas. I (Mr. Integrist) say so by the faculty of my private judgment.

Only we can determine what is a break with tradition and what is a development of it. No, strike that, there ARE NO developments of tradition. Everything falls from heaven like manna into the desert of Michael Matt's mouth.

The Pope has no right to reach out to those groups which have broken off from the Church, though every father would seek out a wayward child.

The Pope has no right to seek to be a peacemaker whatever Matthew 5:9 says! Atila the One expunged all such scriptures from our studies at Kingdom Hall!

The Good Samaritan was a damned heretic, even though Jesus said he reflected more the love of God than the levites on their way to prayer.

The Roman Centurion was a pagan, as were the Magi whose gifts God scandalously did not spurn.

With all schismatics, I say (by the almighty faculty of my private judgment) that the Pope has broken from tradition. And I say, with all heretics, that the Pope is a heretic.

I prefer the hermeneutics of Photius 15, the ancient Copts, Nestorians, etc etc, who understood tradition better than the Popes I hereby excommunicate with my very word. They defined that tradition should STOP at their understanding of it ---- and I do too (only where I say!)

I may interpret and judge tradition even though it is the second prong of revelation which the theologians and Trent say only the Church may mediate.

I prefer "previous" magisteriums to the living magisterium, like Photius again.

We have piety, true valid sacraments just like Photius.

When the Pope kissed the Koran he was expressing the desire to become a Muslim, (and moonlight as a New Age Guru!), not a peacemaker by simply recognizing those truths we share in common, notwithstanding that in Redemptoris Missio he says Muslims and all who "dialogue" with the Church are in fact the objects of the Church's never-ending missionary imperative. We must not go in unclean places, despite Jesus' example of breaking taboos by talking with the heretical Samaritan woman.

By breaking communion with the Church I have broken with charity and therefore am a clanging cymbal (1 Cor 13) -- but I am proud of it. We are the invisible Remnant. Chris Ferrara and Archbishop Lefebvre/Thuc, et al, interpret all scripture and tradition for me. Wherever two or more of them are gathered there is the Holy Spirit acting (for the price of a subscription).

I am the true invisible Catholic Church, the very Remnant, and I will ostracise, excommunicate and harass anyone who says differently. If the law would allow I would quote St. Thomas and turn you all over to the civil powers for a fine roasting -- at the stake.

Yours in it neck-deep,

Signed,
Me Integrist. You Ain't






Footnotes
  1. Stephen Hand, Traditional Catholic Reflections
  2. "Catholic Dictionary", William E. Addis and Thomas Arnold, M.A., Third Edition, Revised, London, Kegan Paul, Trench, & Co., 1885, p.40.
  3. "A Catholic Dictionary", Edited by Donald Attwater, 3rd edition, 1958, p. 27.
  4. Fr. Damien ministered to the lepers of Molaki and, eventually, announced his contraction of the disease by starting his sermon with "We lepers".
  5. Popes From The Ghetto Joachim Prinz; Schocken Books, 1966.
  6. The Great Sacrilege by Fr. James F. Wathen, O.S.J., Tan Books and Publishers, 1971. (Note: Tan is owned by the OSJite, Thomas A. Nelson.)
  7. e-mail cited herein.]
  8. Fidei Catholicae Forum
  9. Griff Ruby's Guest Book entry of Tue Nov 7 18:24:53 PST 2000
    The same Griff Ruby includes Bill Grossklas' "AGENDA Against the SSPX", Dave Armstrong's "Critique of the Remnant, with Copious Documentation", Shawn McElhinney's "Prescription against Tradition", Rick Kephart's "The Source of the 'story'", Stephen Hand, Bro. Alexis Bugnolo's "What Vatican II Really Said", my site: "Sean Ó Lachtnáin's Home Page" and (either Fr. Gruner OR Rick Salbato's Unity Publishing - I do not know which!!!) "'Father Nicholas Gruner' - Unity Publishing" - and two others - on his page Enemies of the Faith on his website
    An inspection of his site should convince one as to just WHO is the "enemy" of the Catholic Faith!!! Reactions from some of the above named include:
    • "Personally, I am thinking of sending a letter of thanks to Mr Ruby, as I consider his 'Faith' to be incompatible with the Roman Catholic Faith." F.J.L.
    • "PS: You can also let this Ruby fellow know that this 'enemy' is having the work he names (Prescription Against "Traditionalism") being reviewed for an Imprimatur by a theologian (I think Pete [Vere] knows him personally) who is acting as Censor Deputatus on the work (and from the Diocese of Lincoln at that). If Ruby can get approval for his work in like manner, I might for at least a second entertain his criticisms. Provided of course that the bishop is in communion with the Roman pontiff."
    • "I will have to refuse to be part of this extinguished crowd unless Fr. Gruner is verily shown the door. :-)  "
    • "Indeed this is a great honor, and I am most humbled to receive it. :-)  Thanks for informing me!"
    • "Thanks for the info. John. I sent Griff a brief note of thanks for the plug."
    • And from one who is NOT mentioned as an "Enemy of the Faith":
      "Actually, if you want to know the truth, I'm mentioned various times on his website, only not by name. Usually, after going one round with me, those who consider me to be an enemy will not mention my name, but opt for anonymous criticism or the cold shoulder treatment. It doesn't bother me for the simple reason that I'm defending God's Church, therefore I am right and they are wrong."
  10. Our Lady of the Rosary Library from Sheila Squires, Guestbook entry 11/08/98 23:07:11.
  11. The Franciscan Archives Click on" Articles" and then on the first article on the OSJ.
  12. The Franciscan Archives Click on" Articles" and then on the second article on the OSJ.
  13. With permission from Steve Hand.
  14. Photius was the father of the Eastern schism in 1054. [Steve Hand's footnote}
Further Reading
On the O.S.J.
An Essay on the Order Of St. John (S.M.O.M.), by James J. Algrant
Are The Knights of Saint John Catholic?, by Rick Salbato
Light On The OSJ by Rev. Anthony Cekada
Note: The author of this file is a former SSPX priest and is a sedevacantist associated with the Thucite CMRI at Mt St. Michael. The file is only listed for the record as an exposure of the OSJ.
Papal Orders and Vatican Court, The, by James J. Algrant
Proliferation of Russian and Other 'Orders' of St John by James J. Algrant, C.St.J.
Priory of St. John of The Sovereign Order Of The Hospital Of St. John Of Jerusalem, The Knights of Malta, by James J. Algrant
Self-styled Orders of Saint John (Part III), The by Guy Stair Sainty
Sovereign Order of Saint John of Jerusalem v. John L. Grady United States Court of Appeals
Tridentine Rite Conference and its Schismatic Cousins, The by Thomas W. Case - Fidelity Magazine, March 1993

And associated matters:
A Prescription Against Traditionalism, by I. Shawn McElhinney
Brickbats On The Pope Receiving The "Mark Of Shiva, AND His New Guinea Mass
Brickbats On the Buddhist statue at Assisi
Brickbats 1 On Sedevacantism and Sedevacantists
Brickbats 2 on Sedevacantism and Sedevacantists
Detection and Overthrow of the "Traditionalist Catholics" Falsely So-Called by I. Shawn McElhinney, Dr. Art Sippo, & Matt1618
Harrison, Fr. Brian W. - on some Sedevacantist claims
Heresy, Schism and Apostasy, by Colin B. Donovan, STL
In Memoriam To The Grand Master of Chevaliers de Notre Dame - Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, The Knights of Notre Dame website
Note: This site is not in communion with Rome; and professes to be able to marry divorced persons. It is also ecumenist.
Lists of "catholics" not in union with Pope John Paul II
On Allegations Re: The 'Mark of Shiva', and New Guinea Mass
Oh What A Web They Weave... The parent document to this file.

June 1, 2001.

Revised: June 9, 2001



Sean Ó Lachtnáin's Home Page