The Sacred and the Profane
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THESACRED AND THE PROFANE THESACRED AND THE PROFANE by THE MOST REVEREND CLARENCE KELLY SEMINARY PRESS P.O. BOX56 ROUND TOP, NEW YORK 12473 A note of thanks to all those who worked so hard in the preparation and the editing of this book. God bless you. Copyright <!:> 1997 by The Most Rev. Clarence Kelly printed in the United States of America CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 A Distressing Phone Call -Not an Isolated Case -Fr. Sanborn's Response to the Consecration-The Answer -The Munari Fiasco -Fr. William Jenkins Wrote of this Method -The Simple Truth -The Reason for this Response -The Method of this Response PART I THE CONSECRATIONS CHAPTER 1 THE BACKGROUND ........... 11 The Trip toGermany - Three Definitive Conclusions - January of 1983, Fr. Cekada's Article-The Need for a Bishop - From Adamant Opponent to Passionate Supporter - September 1988 Meeting and the 1990 Resolution- Moral Intimidation- Gradual Imposition of MSM and Thuc Clergy -A Scandalous Affair CHAPTER 2 FOUR KEY PRINCIPLES ......... 24 CHAPTER 3 PRINCIPLES 1 AND 2 ........... 26 Principle 1: Facts Are Not Presumed (as Certain), but Must Be Proved -Facts Must Be Proved - Notorious Facts -Presumptions of Law -Principle 2: The Burden of Proof Rests upon Him Who Makes the Assertion - Practical Consequences of Principles 1 and 2 - The Proof Required - Documentary Proof - Public Documents -Private Documents -The Force of Public V vi THE SACRED AND THE PROFANE and Private Documents - Testimonial Evidence - Witnesses - Evaluating the Testimony CHAPTER4 PRINCIPLES 3 AND4 . 35 Principle 3: In a Practical Doubt About the Lawfulness of an Action One May Never Act - Principle 4: In Conferring the Sacraments It Is Never Allowed to Adopt a Probable Course of Action as to Validity and to Abandon the Safer Course - Following the Safer Course- Perfect Moral Certitude and the Safer Course - The Consequences of Abandoning the Safer Course CHAPTER 5 THE CASE OF ARCHBISHOP THUC . 41 Documentary Proof - The Value of the One Thuc Document - The Credibility of Archbishop Thuc - The Consecration of Strangers - A Suggested Motive of Money - Doing and Saying as Those Around Him CHAPTER 6 TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE . 52 Testimony of Drs. Hiller and Heller - Cause of Serious Concern - A Witness Should Be a Witness - The Correct Rule - The Absence of Assistant Priests - Reckless Indifference CHAPTER 7 THE MENTAL STATE OF ARCHBISHOP THUC ......... 70 Early History "The Palmar Fiasco" Excommunication and Reconciliation - A Consecration in Between- Consecratingthe Leader of a Non-Catholic Sect - Kozik and Fernandez - The Tae Kwon Do "Nuns" - Mutual "Consecrations" - Simulating a Sacrament - Simulation = Invalidity - Dramatic Turnabout- The Final Reconciliation CHAPTER 8 A GENERAL CONSENSUS ON THUC'S MENTAL STATE .. .. 85 Fr. Cekada and the Mental State of Archbishop Thuc - Fr. Sanbornand the Mental State of Archbishop Thuc - Bishop Barthe and the Mental State of Archbishop Thuc - Cardinal Jose Castillo Lara and the Mental State of CONTENTS vii Archbishop Thuc-The Vatican and the Mental State of Archbishop Thuc - Fr. Barbara and the Mental State of ArchbishopThuc - Resolving the Doubt About Archbishop Thuc' s Mental Competence CHAPTER 9 SOME FINAL OBSERVATIONS .... 94 TheQuestion of Doubt- Positive and Negative Doubt - Valid Motives - Subjective and Objective Doubt - Positive Motives ThatCorrespond to Reality- Resolving the Doubt - In theAbsence of a Binding Decision CHAPTER 10 THE CASE OF BISHOP MENDEZ 101 Documentary Proof - Testimonial Evidence - The• Mental Stateof Bishop Mendez - Carl M. Bengs, M.D. - Timothy Lichter, M.D. - Kelly Dougherty, Hospice Nurse - Clement O'Neill, Attorney - E. David Wininger, Attorney - Dr. Natalie E. White - The Testimony of Others - Conclusions PART II THE LETTER THETEXT OF FR. SANBORN'S APRIL 1995 LETTER TO THE CATHOLIC PEOPLE . 125 THE RESPONSETO FR. SANBORN'S LETTER 132 PARAGRAPH 1 . 132 PARAGRAPH 2 . 139 PARAGRAPH 3 . 140 PARAGRAPH 4 . 143 viii THE SACRED AND THE PROFANE PARAGRAPH 5 . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 155 PARAGRAPH 6 . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 163 PARAGRAPH 7 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 166 PARAGRAPH 8 ....................... 172 PARAGRAPH 9 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 176 PARAGRAPH 10 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 180 PARAGRAPH 11 .. .. .. .. .. .. 193 PARAGRAPH 12 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 196 PARAGRAPH 13 .. .. .. .. .. .. 199 PARAGRAPH14 . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 208 PARAGRAPH 15 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 214 PARAGRAPH 16 . .. .. .. .. 218 PARAGRAPH 17 ...................... 222 PARAGRAPH 18 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 234 PARAGRAPH 19 ...................... 239 PARAGRAPH 20 .. .. .. .. 244 PARAGRAPH 21 ...................... 253 PARAGRAPH 22 ...................... 258 PARAGRAPH 23 ...................... 260 CONTENTS ix CONCLUSION 263 APPENDIX A: DOCUMENTS ............... 265 1. "Si Diligis Me. .. " Statement of Bishop Mendez . 266 2. Letter of Consecration .. .. .. .. .. 267 3. Attestation of Episcopal Consecration .. .. .. 268 4. Declaration of Episcopal Consecration .......... 269 5. Fr.William Jenkins' and Fr. Martin Skierka's Attestations . .. .. .. .. 270 6. Fr.Thomas Mroczka's Attestation ............. 271 7. Ordination Certificate of Fr. Joseph Greenwell .. .. 272 8. Ordination Certificate of Fr. Paul Baumberger ..... 273 9. Page from the Roman Pontificalused at the 1990 ordinations with theessential formmarked .. .. 274 10. Fr. Donald Sanborn's October 2, 1990, letter to Bishop Mendez ........................ 275 11.Petition of theHoly Cross Fathers fordismissal of thesuit challenging the Will andTrust of Bishop Mendez .. .. .. .. 276-277 12. Dr. Carl M. Bengs' Statement ............... 278 13. Dr. Timothy Lichter's Statement .............. 279 14. Mr. E.David Wininger's Statement ........... 280 15. Affidavit of Fr. Zapp's parishioners . .. .. .. 281 16. Mr. Patrick J. Mullen's Affidavit .. .. .. 282-283 17.True copy of May 7, 1993, Confirmation Certificate .. .. .. .. .. .. 284 18.Forged copy of May7, 1993, Confirmation Certificate . .. .. .. .. .. .. 285 19. Bishop Mendez' Signature Comparison 286 APPENDIX B: "TWO BISHOPS IN EVERY GARAGE" .... 287 APPENDIX C: FR.SANBORN'S LATEST POSITION ON THE POPE . .. .. 320 INTRODUCTION A Distressing Phone Call Some time ago I received a phone call from a young lady who attends Mass in one of the Society of St. Pius V chapels. She had received Fr. Donald Sanborn's letter of April 1995 attacking Bishop Alfred F. Mendez along with the Notes on Bishop Mendez & an Episcopal Consecration. She was quite upset. We discussed the letter and the Notes in a general way and, as we did, I sensed that something in particular was really troubling her - something that her modesty and piety prevented her from bringing up. I suspected it had to do with the insinuations of impurity against Bishop Mendez that were contained in Fr. Sanborn's letter and the Notes. I asked if it were so. She said it was. We discussed it. When she learned the truth of the matter, she was greatly relieved. Not an Isolated Case This is not an isolated case. Many good people have been affected by the letter and the Notes. The allegations are hard to believe. Yet, it is harder to believe that a Catholic priest would say such things if they were not true. I myself find it hard to believe that Fr. Sanborn would deliberately string together a series of falsehoods in order to destroy the reputation of a Catholic bishop. I find it hard to believe that any priest would do such a thing. I find it especially hard to believe in this case because Fr. Sanborn wrote to Bishop Mendez to praise him for his courage and to thank him for ordaining Frs. Baumberger and Greenwell. On October 2, 1990, he wrote: 1 2 THE SACRED AND THE PROFANE Your Excellency, Thank you for ordaining to the holy priesthood Frs. Baumberger and Greenwell. Their ordination not only will alleviate some of the burden upon us priests, but even more importantly, will give courage and enthusiasm to the lay people who are so lost in this crisis of the Church. I only wish there were more young men who could be ordained at this time. May God bless you for this most courageous step for the preservation of our holy Catholic Faith in this age of modernism. Sincerely yours in Christ, Fr. Sanborn' In September of 1991, Fr. Sanborn wrote again to Bishop Mendez to tell him that he had written "to all of the bishops of the world" in the hope that one would rise up, come forward and do something. Fr. Sanborn said of this letter to all the Novus Ordo bishops: The letter is addressed to, hypothetically, a validly consecrated bishop who feels that the changes of Vatican II have brought great harm to the Catholic Church, and asks him to rise up and do something about it.2 He went on to say to Bishop Mendez: "We need bishops, Your Excellency." Fr. Sanborn's Response to the Consecration The purpose of Fr. Sanborn's letter to Bishop Mendez is clear. He wanted Bishop Mendez to consecrate a bishop. In fact, prior to his first letter and before the ordinations of Frs. 1 Rev. Donald Sanborn to Bishop Alfred F. Mendez, October 2, 1990, Personal Files of Bishop Clarence Kelly, Round Top, NY. (See Appendix A: Document 10.) Rev. Donald Sanborn to Bishop Alfred F. Mendez, September 3, 1991, Personal Files of Bishop Clarence Kelly, Round Top, NY. INTRODUCTION 3 Baumberger and Greenwell, Fr. Sanborn had visited Bishop Mendez for the express purpose of asking him to consecrate a bishop. Yet, when Bishop Mendez did consecrate a bishop, Fr. Sanborn responded by unleashing, what can only be described as, a vicious personal attack against him. The questions are: how and why. How could Fr. Sanborn say the things he said in his April 1995 letter? How could he send copies of it along with the Notes throughout the country? And why? Why did Fr. Sanborn do this? Why did he seek to completely destroy Bishop Mendez' reputation among traditional Catholic people? Why did he not praise Bishop Mendez for his courage and rejoice over the consecration as he had done when he found out about the 1990 ordinations? The Answer The answer has to do with the Thuc bishops. It has to do with the fact that at some point along the way Fr. Sanborn made a definitive decision to throw in his lot with the Thuc bishops.