Fr. Paul Nicholson has chosen not to respond to yesterday’s post shining the light of truth on his hypocrisy, even though I invited him to do so.
This just might be a good sign; i.e., it may be that he is not willing to heap shame upon himself by denying the close association that he enjoys with Michael Voris and Church Militant.tv in spite of his agreement with his bishop to the contrary.
Of course, we will know if true progress has been made if he henceforth ceases to cast stones at good and holy priests, like Fr. Gruner, and others, like those attached to the SSPX, from the confines of his own glass house.
In any case, I received a number of emails about the previous post that I’d like to address.
More than one reader let me know (as have other commenters here) that CMTV has adamantly denied that anything other than a personal relationship exists between certain people who work there and Fr. Nicholson.
Others have suggested, in defense of Fr. Nicholson, that whatever relationship did exist back in 2013 has since ended, specifically as a result of the agreement that Fr. Nicholson made with his bishop.
To all concerned, I offer the following screen shots that demonstrate rather clearly that the close association between Fr. Nicholson and CMTV endures.
Specifically, what you will see is this:
– A denial from Simon Rafe (sent to a reader) concerning the relationship between Fr. Nicholson and CMTV
– Fr. Nicholson’s website stating that “financial responsibility” for his apostolate rests with the Canadian Theological Forum
– One of many internet listings showing the U.S. mailing address for the Canadian Theological Forum
– The “contact” page for CMTV indicating that their mailing address, and the mailing address for the Canadian Theological Forum, is one and the same
All of which confirms that the “financial responsibility” for Fr. Nicholson’s activities rests with a non-profit that operates out of the CMTV facility; i.e., the connection between them could hardly be closer.
Note: You may have to right click to “view image” in order to make the text legible
This keeps getting more and more ridiculous…
The ‘ “CANADIAN” Theological Forum’ ‘s address is located is MICHIGAN (USA) and is the SAME address as CMTV??!!
Do they really think people are THAT stupid??
You couldn’t make it up.
Are the staff members of CMTV that are involved with the Canadian theological Forum & Father Paul Nicholson members of Opus Dei? In other words what role does Opus Dei have in the Father Paul Nicholson scandal?
I think the questions about Opus Dei, Communism and Father Paul Nicholson needs more attention. The SSPX warned Catholics about Opus Dei: http://archives.sspx.org/miscellaneous/opus_dei.htm many years ago and the SSPX & Father Hesse also warned Catholics about Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer and Communism: http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php/SSPX-on-Opus-Dei
So was Father Hesse out of his head here: http://defeatmodernism.com/defeatmodernism/opusdei or was he a faithfully warning us? I never paid attention to this until I heard Voris and CMTV use the word “reactionary” which is out of the Marxist lexicon heard here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FvQso_9Tk8 So if we traditionalists are “reactionary” what would that make Opus Dei, Father Nicholson,Vericast and CMTV?
“Indeed, the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists.” Pope St. Pius X
Some earlier commentators claim there is an Opus Dei connection here since Michael Voris and Father Richardson are members of Opus Dei. Does the albino monk, Silas, also play a part?
Bravo Louis! Way to dot the i’s and cross the t’s!
Excellent reporting, Mr. Verrecchio. Thank you.
The picture is clearer now. Even the calumnious CMTV “manifesto” now makes more sense.
Once, I held you in high esteem, Mr. Verrecchio. I believed your work and words were to assist souls. I don’t see that any more. You seem more focused on living a bitter man’s life…how can I take him or this priest or whoever Catholic down a notch or expose them for the villain they are. How very sad. I pray you are able to return to the higher calling…help men save their souls and stop playing the egotist that got his feelings hurt. Remember, at judgment snarky may only cost you, ah but that one soul who found their way through you…all will rejoice! May God bless you and your family.
Now might be a good time for Father Nicholson’s Bishop to order him to take a sabbatical to do some serious soul-searching, while considering some less public form of ministry for his future, and ways to make amends for the public and private trusts he has broken.
God grant him sincere remorse and keep him from both pride and despair.
I disagree. Louie’s known about this for quite some time, and Fr. Paul has posted other things which, if Louie was bent on snarkiness, would have given him opportunity to reveal it. Instead he held it till now. Fr. Paul’s behavior was scandalous, giving vent to slandering a priest who had dedicated his life and resources to a holy cause. After doing so, he apparently shut down his comment box, and didn’t respond to questions/challenges. I believe Louie had a responsibility to reveal the hypocrisy. We always need to consider the source when receiving information, and unlike the commenter in the previous blog who seemed unconcerned with verifying veracity, we need to decide who to trust, and how far.
– Thanks again Louie for seeing that this was the right time to reveal this burden, and may Fr. Paul take notice and try to make amends.
I do not believe Mr Verrecchio is bitter, nor interested in exposing villians as you cast him to be. In fact exposing the errors in the Church is probably sad and distasteful to him. But when a priest presents himself in public and publicly makes accusations against a deceased priest, or faithful SSPX members, and Traditional Catholics, then those persons have a right to defend themselves in public and confront their accuser with facts. The deceased cannot defend themselves so it is entirely appropriate for the living to do so. I believe Mr Verrecchio gave Fr N plenty of time to correct his situation with his bishop and probably urged him to do so in private as should always happen. But there comes a point where simple urging is not enough. It looks as if Fr N reached that point.
The purpose Louie had in his previous post was to show that Fr N was harping on those who “disobeyed lawful ecclesial authority” when it seems he himself was doing the same thing. That is hypocrisy. That is why Louie quoted Our Lord with the entirely appropriate spiritual guidance for Fr N to get the beam out of his own eye before he begins to correct another for the same offense. Would I believe a drop dead drunk when he told me to lay off the sauce? NO! I would be more inclined to listen to a formerly addicted person who quit drinking who gave me the same advice, because he would be speaking from experience and authority.
Peace and Blessings
Michael Francis Poulin
So you are fine with Fr. Nicholson slandering a good priest and want nobody, not even Louie, to defend an innocent man by simply pointing out the hypocrisy of others?
I don’t think you do, but you either don’t know what is going on or the point escaped you.
The funny thing is, nobody here, not even Louie mind that Fr. Nicholson and ChurchMilitantTV share any sort of relationship and would resort to some sleight of hand in order to do what is right in our troubling times with troublesome bishops.
But what’s good for the Goose must then be good for the Gander. Fr. Nicholson can’t blast Fr. Gruner for something he himself casually does – disobey authority.
Even more so given that the facts in Fr. Gruner’s case were not that he was unwilling to obey authority, but that there was no reason he reasonably could because he was being set up to fail by unknown persons for unspecified reasons, which was when a brave bishop finally stood up for Fr. Gruner and took him in.
All this of course ties into the controversy of Fatima, which I highly doubt Fr. Nicholson has the cajoles to take on, even presuming he sided with it. And unfortunately we know that ChurchMilitantTV would rather not touch it, but at least they have the decency to remain quiet.
Cheerios… You’re always welcome here.
I suspect you’re not alone in the sentiments you expressed, so I appreciate the opportunity your comment gives me to respond.
I didn’t invite the information freely given to me by Fr. Nicholson relative to his own approach to obedience to his bishop. I made no pledge of secrecy in order to be apprised of his stealthiness. Much less did I or anyone else invite his unwarranted and unprovoked attacks against good people like Fr. Gruner, who I admired very much.
Had he not used his “pulpit” to perpetrate calumny as he has, none of this would have transpired.
What you don’t know is that I reached out to Fr. Nicholson a number of times directly to encourage him to engage the objects of his denigration directly, to afford them the courtesy of answering his charges in their own words. I also offered him the opportunity to clarify his own words before taking it upon myself to defend them.
He obviously declined.
I simply told the truth in defense of good people.
Sometimes the truth is ugly. If telling it offends some folks, I’m not exactly surprised, but on the other hand, there’s not much I can do about it.
Sitting silent while “family” is being attacked may sometimes be prudent (hard for me to imagine), but at other times it’s just plain weak.
Maybe I struck the right balance; maybe not, but the bottom line is, I told the truth. If that’s my greatest crime, I good with it.
We must assume you wouldn’t have written your above comment unless you considered it to be necessary charitable fraternal correction from you to Louie. So why is it that you judge it as only a bitter man egotistically taking others down a notch, when the same type of correction comes from Louie to someone else.
–Did you not try [for his own good?] to “take Louie down a notch ” telling him you ONCE held him in high esteem, and once believed he was working to assist souls–but not any more?
-And are you not judging his interior motives –which only God knows–as sinful, when you assume he acts out of bitterness and ego, rather than from moral decency and righteous indignation, –which are not sinful at all? Why else would you say you will pray he “returns to the higher calling?
—Wouldn’t it be safer for you to assume the best motives, rather than the worst, and simply discuss how it’s coming across to you?
God Bless 🙂 🙂
What an excellent point, Indignus Famulus!
Thank you for your defense of “family.”
I’ve seen this before – what is the proof that these two men are members of Opus Dei? And if we are not ‘fans’ of this organization, surely membership in it does not suggest skullduggery in itself…
Something good: the remembrance card from Father Gruner’s funeral has a lovely picture of the statue of Our Lady of Fatima, and on the back is a little picture of the good father, the dates of his birth and death – then simply The Hail Mary.
That says it all.
Thanks for the update post, Louie. There might still be a Christero mindset that will unite Traditional Catholics against a common enemy for the common good.
PS. I noticed on a Vortex dealing with the apostasy of Michael Coren, Michael Voris addressed it with a straighforward (Verrecchioan) sense of the Faith. Voris excused his straight talk by stating: “[S]ince this has all happened so publicly it therefore warrants a public response…” If every self professed traditional Catholic actually followed this ‘for the common good’ approach (including ‘happened so publicly’ with regards to Club Bergoglio), we’d be sharing a lot more dinners and having a real brotherhood in the Faith rather than an on-going food for thought fight.
The Opus Dei angle explains everything.
We used to say the same thing about the Jesuits. 😉
The Catholic food for though fight reminds me of the Dicknanigans.
Exactly – although I’m not sure a lot of people are “getting it” actually.
I guess it’s due to their lack of knowledge about how opus dei operates, the mentality of its members, etc.
Regarding Fr N. – have you done a google search on the topic? You should find plenty of sources and it’d be superfluous of me to include them here.
Regarding Mr Voris – he’s done flat-out propaganda for opus dei in the “Vortex”, he’s associated himself with an opus dei priest, and leads an enterprise financed by opus dei members and he’s NOT associated with opus dei in some shape, manner, or form?
I am pretty ignorant about opus dei, but keep getting negative vibes about it. Please will you fill me in?
Louie—You were MAN enough to respond to Cheerios. Will Father Nicholson be MAN enough to respond to YOU??? I guess time will tell. However, I suggest we don’t hold our breath.
Thank you, LOUIE—You are doing a great job of defending the true Catholic Church!!! Keep up the good work!! God bless!
I agree, and it seems Louie’s observations are only the tip of the iceberg.
This website adds more to the story in response to Louie’s post.
Dear Peter Lamb,
This article that Angelus Press publishes explains it well.
Wow. I don’t think detective work like this has been evidenced since Jim Garrison noticed that Lee Harvey Oswald and his Fair Play for Cuba organization shared the same building with Guy Bannister. But it was a corner building with two different street addresses. What Garrison found was that this building was the intelligence center of New Orleans. Perhaps you can crack the Kennedy assassination case next!
For someone who has such attention to detail, it is odd that you still haven’t figured out that Father Nicholson made the video concerning Father Gruner 364 days before Gruner’s death. The video was published on youtube on April 30, 2014.
Naive Jones… I mean, Innocent Smith, I replied to your astute observations in the previous post.
The Coren thing was a shocker. I just found out recently. I actually sat in the studio audience years ago when Voris did a show with Coren about his book “Why Catholics are Right”.
Thanks for pointing out the salient facts:
– that you knew when the video was first made,
-that Fr. Nicholson posted that year-old video on his Facebook page,
-on the day after Fr. Gruner died,
-along with his mention of the death.
This is a link to some saintly words from Father Cappello. Worth reading.
One quote stands out:
“Regarding charity, I will endeavor to make myself distinguished in the practice of it, by always being affable, sweet, polite, delicate, full of courtesy and delicacy with everyone and in every single circumstance.” (Intention made during spiritual retreat exercises in 1939).”
I am in NO WAY suggesting the Louie, or anyone here, has not acted with charity to anyone. More, it’s a reminder to myself to TRY to live this quote.
I get caught up in my frustration (no, let’s call it anger and be done with it) that so few know the Truth, or care.
So reading this good priest’s wise words is a gentle reminder to myself to weigh my words, and sieve them through Charity. I ought to learn to speak Truth, but always discuss the deed, not the doer – that’s the tricky part for me – have a hard time separating the two.
On your special day, Our Lady of Fatima, accept our poor petitions on behalf of an unknowing and uncaring world. Ask your Beloved Son to shower Actual Graces upon those who search for His Truth, but are led astray. May He move their wills towards Him. Amen
Servant of Our Lady,
Perhaps the most damning evidence from the article you linked is the following (from Fr N.’s facebook page):
“There are remarkable similarities between Pope Francis and St. Josemaria Escriva [really? “St” Josemaria is THAT uncatholic?]. Most notably, they are both suspected of heresy [heresy! *gasp* unthinkable!] because of the novelty of their approach…”
But, as we catholics know, “all novelty in faith is a sure mark of heresy.” (St. Vincent of Lerins)
“For Catholics, nothing will remove the authority of the Second Council of Nicaea, where it condemns those who dare, after the impious fashion of heretics to deride ecclesiastical traditions, to invent novelties of some kind or to endeavor by malice or craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic Church.” Encyclical Letter Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907
“New revelations regarding faith or morals … have always been abhorred and challenged in the Church … Hence, the Sovereign Pontiffs, the Councils, and the Fathers have been most careful to reject all novelties or new doctrines on matters of faith which differed from those already received.”
St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori
See also here on the testimony of an Oxford professor (there are other testimonies on the site too on what opus dei is really about):
We are grateful for these reminders to discipline ourselves-especially when correcting others. And it never hurts to stop and examine our true motives-regardless of the circumstances. But there is another aspect to this matter of Charity in speech and manner that sometimes gets bowled over by ideas mentioned in quotes like the one you cited.–very reminiscent of Saints like Therese. Not every situation calls for that type of response, as Our Lord demonstrated when he knotted those ropes together to make a whip, and drove the money-changers from the temple–in his zeal for His father’s house as a place of prayer. We sometimes are induced to feel guilty for reacting with justified anger to evil, after reading such pledges as this–to “always” be affable and sweet. There’s a right balance to it all, and we can find it with practice. It’s got to do with how much “self” is being defended, and how much of what is said and done is for others, as well.
Your honesty is appreciated and always refreshing.
What is this man’s obsession with selfies, sacrilege, and
But, but… Francis is bringing all the denominations together. Unity is in the “holy spirit” of every “christian” that calls each other “brother”.
Thank you Servant of Our Lady, In Hoc Signo Vinces and AlphonsusJr. I read the articles and had a good look around the ODAN site. I found the article “Opus Dei: A Strange Pastoral Phenominon very illuminating.
In effect Opus Dei was the modernistic precursor of VII:
“De Berglar: When in 1950 the founder finally obtained permission from the Holy See to admit non-Catholics and non-Christians into the work, as ‘cooperators,’ the spiritual family of the Opus Dei was complete.”
“De Vasquez: It was something unheard of in the pastoral history of the Church, it was to tear out the locks and to throw open the doors, integrating the souls of protestant, schismatic, Jewish, Muslim and pagan benefactors.”
Thanks very much. 🙂
Please help by pointing out where this papal preacher goes wrong….
I felt uneasy reading through what appears a very articulate article…one example is where he implies St Augustine has a disordered theology, and seems to rank Luther as a giant of Western thought( and not a heretic)
Here is a quote…
“I am speaking of course of St. Augustine. The polemic against the Pelagians drove him to highlight first and foremost the role of grace in preserving and healing from sin, the so-called prevenient, helping and healing grace. His doctrine of original sin, as a real hereditary sin that is transmitted through the sexual act of generation, caused baptism to be seen chiefly as liberation from original sin.
What made the occasional loss of balance, in Augustine’s case, so decisive and so long-lasting? The answer is simple: his own unique stature and authority! When a man appeared in the West comparable to him for hardiness and originality of mind, he did not restore the balance to Augustine’s thinking but exacerbated it. I am speaking of Martin Luther. He won for the whole of Christianity the merit of putting the Word of God, Scripture, back at the center and above everything, even the Fathers of the Church. However, his insistence on the total corruption of human nature and the radical sinfulness of man made him stress too unilaterally the negative element of Christian salvation, that is, how sinners are justified.”
Mortalium Animos p. 10. says;
” The union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one, True Church, of those who are separated from it , for in the past they have unhappily left it.”
The hand-picked Papal household preacher, has an entirely different set of standards. His entire talk is about following the Holy Spirit to Unity, as if the Church does not already possess unity as one of her four marks, and is “working” towards it. He disputes the meaning of Scriptures, to conform with his ideas, as modernists typically do. So when you read his long talks, every word must necessarily be suspect, if you’re being sensible.
And when he broaches subjects like the life of St. Augustine–who wrote his book of retractions before his death, don’t forget–and that of Martin Luther, it’s no wonder you feel “uneasy”. These were both men who greatly impacted the world with their ideas. Like most people they were capable of being right and of being wrong. Personally, we wouldn’t rely on Pope Francis’ friends to help us sort out which was which. There are better ways to spend your research time. (IOHO)
Yes, IF, well-said indeed.
Yeah, it was a shocker. I read that book and I watched some of his ‘sun tv’ stuff as well. I guess the divide between the authentic Catholicism he was being called to and engaging with, and the ‘catholicism’ being taught by the kasper krowd was too great and he just fell through the gap. There is certainly no ‘friend of kasper’ who would be anything but pleased or indifferent with such an apostasy, since there is no apostasy, according to them. Put it this way, certainly no one from Club Bergoglio will be praying for his return.
Am enjoying working my way through Spirago-The Catechism Explained, as a two year project