Sedevacantist Watch…
SEDEVACANTIST BISHOP DAN DOLAN CONCEDES THAT ONLY THE CHURCH IS THE JUDGE OF
“THE QUESTION OF FACT” (“JUDGING WHO IS A TRUE PRIEST/POPE”)
“Since your
ordination was done with one hand, we must hold your ordination to be dubious,
unless evidence can be brought forth that the one-handed ordination is
certainly valid. We therefore urge you ad cautelam to stop saying Mass, hearing
confessions and administering the sacrament of Extreme Unction until this
problem is resolved.”[1]
 |
| Fr. Clarence Kelly |
In the following reply from Dolan to Fr. Kelly, notice that Dolan argues
that it is the Church, not Fr. Kelly, who investigates and decides the “facts”
– which is precisely what we said in our previous article, titled “Mario
Derksen’s Elementary Error On “Fact Versus Law.” Here is Dolan in his own
words:
“The Church, not
Father Kelly, investigates and decides the facts. Those impugning the validity
of an ordination present their case to the Holy Office, which conducts an
investigation, hears the evidence of all parties, examines the witnesses and
establishes what the facts are. Let’s repeat that: the Holy Office
investigates, weighs the evidence and establishes the facts. Nothing there or
in Canon Law about Father Kelly investigating, weighing evidence and
establishing facts. Nothing there or in Canon Law about a priest having to
answer ‘evidence’ Father Kelly finds convincing. Ditto for the rest of the clergy
who signed the letter to me.”[2]
(emphasis in original)
 |
| Fr. Anthony Cekada |
 |
| Mario Derksen, Fr. Cekada's disciple |
Dolan’s hypocrisy was further exposed when he accused Kelly of basing
his conclusion (that a one-handed ordination to the priesthood is invalid) upon
his own private interpretation of theologians, when Dolan himself declares
invalid the pontificates of the conciliar Popes by his own private
interpretation of theologians. In fact, Dolan bases his conclusion on the
teaching of only certain theologians, since he doesn’t even consider the
theologians who explicitly disagree with his opinion concerning the question of
law (e.g., Cajetan, Suarez, John of
St. Thomas, Fr. Ballerini, Bouix, etc.).
St. Thomas, Fr. Ballerini, Bouix, etc.).
Dolan also accused Kelly of shady and even deceptive research tactics,
after he took the time to look up the sources that Fr. Kelly cited. Fr. Kelly
had claimed that these authorities maintained that a one handed ordination is
doubtful. Guess what Dolan discovered when he looked up these sources for
himself? He discovered that they do not actually teach what Fr. Kelly claimed!
That is no surprise for us. While we do not take up the question of whether the
imposition of one hand suffices for ordination to the priesthood (that question
of law can only be resolved by the Church), we find it very interesting that
Fr. Dolan himself discovered precisely what we ourselves found while writing
True or False Pope?, namely, that Sedevacantist writers (both clergy and laity)
consistently misquote their sources and misrepresent the author’s actual
positions.
Listen to Dolan’s accusations against Kelly:
“You
misrepresent what your sources say. You state that sacerdotal ordinations in
which the bishop imposes only one hand are ‘dubious,’ and give page references
to two works. I looked up your references. Neither writer – one of whom left
the priesthood – states that ordinations so performed are ‘dubious.’… When you
want to paint someone as a public sinner, excommunicated, doubtfully ordained
or a schismatic, you find a sentence or two in a book by a theologian or
canonist. You twist its meaning, and strain to apply it to your victim’s
actions. Then, even though it be the opinion of just one author, you present it
in terms of ‘Canon Law requires,’ or “Moral theology says.”[4]
Dear reader, this is EXACTLY what we discovered when
investigating the
writings of the Sedevacantist apologists! Can a better explanation (by a
Sedevacantist!) be given of the modus operandi of Sedevacantists, who sit in
private judgment over the Popes? Not to mention their private judgment and
public declarations concerning the validity of the new rite of episcopal
consecration, which Fr. Cekada has publicly declare to be null and void.
While Dolan rebuked Kelly for concluding that a one-handed ordination is
invalid based upon his personal reading of theologians, Dolan and his
colleagues do exactly the same thing in their judgment of the conciliar Popes
(and the new, post-Vatican II rite of episcopal consecration). They personally
interpret their theology manuals, decide which theological opinions they will
accept, and then make judgments of theology and law that are reserved for the
Church alone. They “then proceed to condemn the victim outright,” not only
those who were ordained and consecrated according to the new rites, but also
elected by the Church as the Vicars of Jesus Christ!
Fr. Dolan accurately describes the tactics used by Sedevacantists, who
“find a sentence or two in a book by a theologian or canonist,” only to “twist
its meaning, and strain it to apply to their victim’s actions.” Our book True
or False Pope? shows this in spades with their mistreatment of St. Bellarmine,
who said “the manifest heretic is ipso facto deposed,” but at the same time
condemned the deposition of heretical Bishops by private judgment. The
Sedevacantists’ root error regarding this point is a failure to understand the
distinction between the Church’s determination of the crime (question of fact),
and the speculative question of when and how a heretical Pope would lose his
office after the Church’s determination (question of law). The ipso facto loss
of office does not occur until the Church itself establishes the fact.
While Dolan accused Kelly of deceptive tactics, he should have accused
Kelly of usurping the Church’s authority to judge this question of law in the
first place, just as he rightly accused Kelly of usurping the Church’s
authority to judge the question of fact. The Church alone – and not unbalanced,
vigilante Sedevacantists – is the final judge of such questions of law and
theology, just as she is the final judge on the question of fact. Moreover,
questions of law must first be resolved by the Church before they can be
applied to the facts of a case, whether in secular or ecclesiastical
jurisprudence.
As we demonstrated in our feature on Mario Derksen, Fr. Cekada and
Bishop Sanborn have both conceded that the Church alone has the authority to
definitively judge questions of speculative theology and law. Before Sanborn
and Cekada were kicked out of the Society of St. 5 Pius X, they signed a
resolution which states that “the Magisterial authority of the Church is the
sole arbiter of theological questions” and that the S.S.P.X. cannot “usurp that
teaching authority by attempting to settle definitively questions of
speculative theology.”[5]
Of course, whether and how a Pope would
lose his office for heresy is such a “question of speculative theology” (which
has never been decided by the Church), just as is the question of whether the
imposition of one hand suffices for priestly ordination.
As we saw, on the question of fact, Dolan says: “The Church” “decides
the facts” and “establishes the facts.” On the question of law, Sanborn and
Cekada say: “The Church alone” is “the sole arbiter” on “matters of speculative
theology,” and individuals have “absolutely no authority” to “usurp that
teaching authority.”[6]
Again, we couldn’t have said it better. Once
a person realizes the truth that these Sedevacantist clerics have themselves
conceded, it is the end for Sedevacantism.
Only pride would prevent Dolan, Sanborn and Cekada from seeing that
their own arguments completely refute their Sedevacantist position.
Unfortunately, such pride would also blind them from seeing the damage they
have done to souls, by leading them out of the Church and into their
Sedevacantist sect. Indeed, Dolan accuses Kelly of causing him great damage,
due to Kelly’s private judgment of the facts and law concerning Dolan’s
ordination. Dolan says:
“In blackening
my name by attacking my ordination, you have committed a mortal sin. You,
Father, and your confreres each owe me a retraction – not an apology - but a
retraction.”[7]
He then said: “You must also repair the
damage you have done so far…”[8]
and added: “I have enclosed a simple retraction and pledge for each of you to
sign and return to me.”[9]
(As far as we know, no retraction was forthcoming from either Fr. Kelly or any
of his confreres.)
But what Dolan declares to be “utterly contemptible and unspeakably
evil,”[10]
when directed toward himself, are the very same methods he and his colleagues
use to declare the conciliar Popes antipopes. It is also the exact same tactic
they use to cast doubt upon the new rites of ordination and consecration that
were approved by the Church (what Fr. Cekada declares “absolutely null and
utterly void” was approved by Cardinal Ottaviani with no reservations). If
“blackening” Dolan’s name by “attacking [his] ordination” is a mortal sin, how
much more serious of a crime is it to blacken the name of virtually every
priest who has been ordained in the new rite over nearly the past 50 years?
But, of course, declaring that most of the Church’s priests are not true
priests helps Bishop Dan Dolan and his partner Fr. Anthony Cekada maintain the
survival of their own little sect at St. Gertrude the Great parish in West
Chester, Ohio, since the scandalized sheep, who blindly follow them, will feel
themselves to be trapped, imagining that they have nowhere else to go for valid
sacraments. Such is the evil fruit of the evil tree of Sedevacantism. May those
of goodwill see the hypocrisy of these men, and of the Sedevacantist position
itself, which is refuted by the arguments of its own proponents.
Read as PDF
[1] Letter from Fr.
Kelly to Fr. Dolan, September 21, 1990, http://www.scribd.com/doc/
246398985/1990-Letter-to-Dolan-on-One Handed-Ordination.
[2] Fr. Dolan’s reply
to Fr. Kelly, October 5, 1990. http://www.scribd.com/doc/24604978
3/DOLAN-S-REPLY
[3] We would also like
to ask Fr. Dolan “what Holy Office” he is asking Fr. Kelly to petition, since
both of them believe the post-conciliar Vatican hierarchy has completely
defected from the Church, and thus there is no “Holy Office.” Funny how Dolan
would appeal to an authority that both he and Kelly reject. It is evidently
quite convenient for Dolan to appeal to Church authority when it will help his
case, but it is the same authority that he actually rejects (or claims to
reject) in his daily life.
[4] Fr. Dolan’s reply
to Fr. Kelly, October 5, 1990. http://www.scribd.com/doc/24604978
3/DOLAN-S-REPLY.
[5] Letter of ‘the
Nine’ to Abp. Marcel Lefebvre, (March 25, 1983; emphasis added), http://
www.traditional mass.org/articles/article.php?id=48&catname=12.
[6] 6 See our feature
“Mario Derksen’s Elementary Error on Fact versus Law” at
www.trueorfalsepope.com.
[7] 7 Fr. Dolan’s reply
to Fr. Kelly, October 5, 1990. http://www.scribd.com/doc/24604978
3/DOLAN-S-REPLY.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid
[10] Ibid
