Okie Trad Publicly Defamed by Second Tulsa Priest, Fr. Alessandro Calderoni, over Diocesan Latin Mass Shut Down in Tulsa , OK. My Thoughts.

 Fr. Alessandro Calderoni 

Tulsa Diocese

Ordained 2021

Introduction: 

You can’t make this up.  Here is the timeline leading up to this. 

LifeSiteNews picks up my article (see it below, post before last, and a link to their article) last week about the Shutdown of a 13 year old Tulsa TLM community in a diocesan parish, and also recent restrictions of the Mass of the Ages at Holy Cross in Wagoner, an hour east of Tulsa.  

This is in the wake of the final implementation of the Traditionis Custodes "final solution," requiring the eventual total elimination of the traditional Mass from every parochial parish in every single diocese.  That logically would apply to every single parochial parish in the Tulsa Diocese.  You just have to read the document, its attached letter, and subsequent Vatican documents on it. 

Michael Lofton made a video about it (link in post below).  Blogger comments don’t work here (not sure why), and comments by new contributors are on pause at the LSN article. 

Next, in order to make an official statement representing the diocese, the Vicar of Priests, Fr. Bryan Brooks,  leaves a patronizing comment at Lofton’s video, about me and my blog as a source, followed by a false defamatory accusation about the LSN article and what I wrote.  See my last blog post.  The priest is not responding to my points or questions, or subsequent requests for retraction or editing.  The chancery responded it is backing up what he said as “reasonable.” The priest and diocese will not retract or amend his comments.  

And if this dynamic hasn’t yet unraveled into absurdity, for good measure tonight Fr. Alessandro Calder unjustifiably and publicly chastised me (not per se as the blogger, but by my non-pen name) to an entire online group of fellow local traditional Catholics.  Fortunately I captured everything that was said through screenshots. I’ve emailed him to unblock me and please explain his judgment, so we can feel comfortable going forward attending their Masses with the group.  

I have asked to meet with the Bishop this week before this community is dissolved after this Sunday, their last Mass being at 10:30 am.  I do not plan to pursue this for long, as it is taxing, but I will at least see this through to the final shut down.  Until the "fat lady sings."

Here is the Public Exchange (my name, my wife’s name, and the name of one of the moderators is redacted):

One of Their Moderators:

I Respond:

Her Reply: 

I was clarifying my question, about trying to understand why the Bishop made this decision , in a polite, light-hearted, friendly way, adding my hope “I’m still praying for a last minute miracle.” This clearly was a reference to the hope that the Sts. Peter and Paul TLM Community continues, the official announcement made just last month. 

She responds to this correcting me that I/we must trust and humbly obey.  This is clearly a response to my question about the decision and desire that the TLM Community Not End.   Note I was polite and expressing a legitimate question yet she, the Moderator, needed to remind me about Obedience. 

First, this needs to be said, a woman who is and behaves like a lady would speak respectfully to a man, even if she has never met him, and not act as if she is placing herself in a position of authority over him, especially if she is a traditional Catholic.  Second, this response was a red flag.  It implied my benign comment somehow raised concerns about my attitude towards obedience.  Third, all things considered, that attitude represents blind, servile obedience. 

In essence it means “Be silent about this.  Do not express your concerns or grievances, just take it and move on. We all have drunk the Kool-Aid, now you need to drink it like the rest down and lay down. The bishop made his decision so it is not obedient and trusting to question or appeal the decision.”  This is to the whole group, many people commenting and reading it that night.  Who will likely discuss and remember it later.   Wonderful.

That is why I responded with this post:

This is, as anyone who has read the Baltimore Catechism, or the Catechism of the Council of Trent, or the Angelic Doctor would understand, the orthodox and traditional doctrine on obedience to a bishop.  Note I am making it clear that I am not judging his intentions, but not being silent about this decision either, or the pattern of ending FOUR traditional communities in the diocese. That is it. That was my supposed departure from the  Church’s teachings on Obedience. 

Suddenly the Associate Pastor, a Priest, who has never met or interacted with me (outside of confession) interjects into the exchange: 

First, it seems I “do” have an issue?  Ok. So by “do” he obviously means that was already his concern before this exchange.  The only possibility of what that refers to is me and my wife asking in the FB group about why the decision was made, and me suggesting a petition/meeting with the bishop.   We did not hear the explanation from the pulpit.   

He publicly accused me in front of the group and anyone on the internet reading a public page, of having “an issue with obedience."  As if blind obedience isn't itself a sin.  This is a public moral judgment by the Associate Pastor of a man he doesn’t even know.  That is very serious and illegal.  

To “presume” to know better than the bishop would mean I am making a moral judgment of the bishop and that I know with certainty his decision was morally wrong.  No, I have only made a logistical analysis of the logistical issue of maintaining the TLM at SSPP, raising the question why it could not work.  I clearly expressed my personal opinion about the SITUATION of the Community being dissolved. This is not presumption or disobedient, this is a local Catholic with a personal history attending the TLM at SSPP, with a vested interest, voicing publicly his concern and grievance about the loss of now four traditional communities.  What is next??   Either the priest can read minds and hearts , or he would have to create his own definition of “presume.”

This keeps getting even more absurd... 

So I do respond: 

This is what I do.  If someone accuses me of something, especially if it is a serious accusation, and it makes no sense to me, at face value seems unreasonable, I turn the bullying dynamic back on them and ask them to explain exactly their evidence or rational for the accusation. When they will not explain, deflect, and pull back, those are classic signs their claim is absurd.

And, as expected, this is the reply I got:

Um, you’re not sure what I was referring to?  Didn’t you attend seminary in Rome?  Aren't you a priest?  You’re honestly not understanding what I’m asking?  You don’t know what I mean by (said my WIFE’s FIRST NAME)??   Either you don’t know that is an actual NAME, or you’re gaslighting. Not to mention demonstrating a serious level of disrespect to me and my wife....Fr. A...As if you’re trying to offend. There is zero chance this wasn’t intentional and thought out before posting it.  From a priest.

I Replied: 

Do I respond with disrespect?  Do I talk to him the way he is talking to me?  Did he now realize he wasn’t addressing some stranger to the Community?  Does he know that we have history there, long before he became a priest?  I've been a practicing local Catholic DECADES before you were even born, Padre.  Does he even care about our hope to still attend or even care?  I explained why I had replied twice to the Moderator, as if I had been showing “issues with obedience” from the earlier posts talking about raw goat's milk, and asking how many TLM's will now be offered each month at Holy Cross, an hour from th city.  

You can’t make this up. 

Minutes later all my comments are gone, and I’m blocked from the group. 

When politely asked twice for an explanation for his accusation, again he refuses an honest, straightforward, fair answer.   Because he knows his accusation is false and unreasonable, and unlike him I’m maintaining proper respect for him in his station in life, while he clearly isn't.  He is clearly demonstrating a pretentious attitude towards the laity, or an attitude of selective respect, and disregard for their rights and dignity.  This is shameful to come from a priest.  What he did literally meets the definition of spiritual and psychological abuse, clergy abuse/clergy malpractice, public defamation, and narcissism.  

I promise you I will file a formal complaint with the Diocese and US Papal Nuncio, seeing it through to its end, and seek legal counsel. 

My Theological Analysis:

First, publicly calling into question or criticizing decisions made by your bishop, or the Vatican, is permitted by the Catholic Church, and the way that must be respectful does not always require private, quiet, pleasing discussion. When there is a crisis, that affects the common good, and a certain state of injustice that causes grave harm, there needs to be public voices crying out in the wilderness, raising measured objections, and begging for truth and fairness.   

Second, that does not violate obedience nor presume what the bishop must do.  No civil or canon law forbids this. In fact Canon 212 permits and even encourages this. Obedience is a virtue, but if no law or specific commandment is broken, the other extreme or VICE of false obedience, or blind, servile obedience must also be avoided.  Its at the other extreme. 

There is the psychological phenomon of one person dead set at one end of the extreme, seeing the man in the middle as if he himself is on the opposite extreme.  This is called projection and false dichotomy.

Third, every Catholic has a right publicly to express their grievances, including in writing, including on the internet, or through a public rally or assembly, when the essentials of the Catholic Faith are at stake, including the traditional Catholic Mass, as is being done in Detroit this Saturday (LINK).  Every Catholic has a right to suggest or organize petitions to the bishop essentially begging or imploring him for what they need.  Those are not actually exceptional practices, they are actually the norm during a critical situation.   

Third, every Catholic has a right to Mass in their own liturgical rite, everywhere.  Latin Rite Catholics have a right to the Latin Rite, especially in dioceses that are formally Latin Rite. That also means that it is the birthright of every Latin Rite Catholic to the ancient and venerable form of the Latin Rite, in particular as finally and ultimately codified by Pope St. Pius V.  

Fourth, Documents and theological texts interpreting Summorum Pontificum of Pope Benedict XVI make it clear that it is binding Magisterial teaching about the liturgy (therefore its liturgical teaching could not be abrogated by the policy of Traditionis Custodes), a recognition that the Latin Mass is a universal, permanent right to be honored and upheld, not merely as part of our heritage, to be remembered or practiced by a few old fashioned people on the margins, but as something universal across space and time.  

Fifth, this is the wide and broad interpretation of SP and liturgical tradition, supporting a universal generous giving of this treasure to everyone, everywhere, and not a strict, legalistic, narrow, cold, administrative limiting of the traditional Roman Mass meant to ultimately push it into the margins and over the edge into the abyss. The former is Catholic and pastoral, as in providing food for the sheep by our Shepherds. The latter is dictatorial and like a secular corporation, and not what Christ established.  When we were baptized, received our First Holy Communion, and Confirmation, we were not initiated into a secular corporation or communist commune.

And sixth, lastly, this means it has its place in every Latin Rite parish in every part of every Latin Rite diocese regardless of the personal opinions or wishes of the diocesan Ordinary, until the end of time.  God did not establish true worship for the sake of obedience to the hierarchy based on what one particular bishop or one particular pope during one period of time wants for worship.  It is the other way around.  He  made the hierarchy to give the Faithful true worship for the greater glory of God and to save our souls, through the medium of Sacred Tradition. 

Sacred Tradition (divine and ecclesial, marvelously combined) is not subordinate to the current hierarchy.  The hierarchy is subordinate to Sacred Tradition, who are simply its custodians charged with clearly and uniformly transmitting it throughout every sector of every diocese.  

Whether out in the country outside of the city, in a rural town, in a poor part of the city, near a monastery, or in an affluent part of the city. Tradition cannot and should not be confined as it typically is today to ghettos or places far removed from the city.  

It must be upheld everywhere, especially throughout every city, to reach the largest population.  That means for the city of Tulsa, the Latin Mass and Tradition should be alive and well also at Holy Family cathedral, Christ the King, St. Mary’s, Mary Magdalene, St. Bernard’s, St. Anne’s, St. Benedict’s, St. Thomas Moore, AND Sts. Peter and Paul.  Not to mention other nearby suburban parishes.  

If you agree with what I’m saying, please today call the Tulsa chancery and respectfully express your concern, which also doesn’t mean being politically correct or quietistic about it.  

Diocese of Tulsa 

918-294-1904

Or email Bishop Konderla:

julianne.obrien@dioceseoftulsa.org

(source: their website)

The DEATH of a Latin Mass Community will otherwise occur this Sunday, June 29th.  I’m doing my part.  Please help.  At the very least so that this doesn’t quietly fade from people’s memories in a few weeks (or days), but will be remembered for years to come.  Please, if you are local, ask to talk to the bishop, present petitions, letters, peacefully rally and pray outside of the chancery (91st street in Broken Arrow, OK, has a nice sidewalk across the street).  Save the Mass, save the Church!  Save the Church, save souls!!