The "Mendez-Kelly" Affair

by Fr. Daniel Sanborn. © 2000 catholicrestoration.org

We present two documents pertinent to the debate.It is interesting to note in passing that he who first charged the "Thuc" consecrations with invalidity should now fall foul of his own invented criteria....

Open Letter of Rev. Donald J. Sanborn

April 1995

My dear Catholic people,

In recent months, you have most probably heard of an alleged episcopal consecration of Fr. Clarence Kelly. As the story goes, on October 19, 1993, in the bedroom chapel of the then 86-year-old Bishop Alfred Mendez, Fr. Kelly was consecrated a bishop in an ultra-secret ceremony, in the presence of only five other priests.

No word of the alleged consecration was breathed until shortly after the death of Bishop Mendez on January 28th, 1995.

The announcement of the consecration came in the form of personal presentations made by some of the priests who were allegedly present at the consecration. The overall impression given by these presentations was that Bishop Mendez was a thoroughly traditional and saintly bishop, with a stainless theological, liturgical, and moral record.

This last point is significant, since the priests associated with this alleged consecration are those who have for years been extremely critical of other priests. They have criticized other priests for becoming involved with bishops whose consecrations derive ultimately from Archbishop Thuc. They have said that Archbishop Thuc was not truly traditional, that he did scandalous things, that he was not in his right mind. And they maintain that any bishop who comes from Archbishop Thuc's orders is tainted by his alleged scandals and alleged mental incapacity.

As we shall see, however, by uncanny irony Fr. Kelly himself has emerged from an alleged consecration that labors under these very problems: one that is difficult to prove, one in which the consecrator was neither traditional nor of high reputation, and whose mental capacity at the time of the alleged consecration &151; is called into doubt by his own family members and religious order.

The Enclosed list of Facts

Ordinarily the episcopal consecration of any traditional priest should be the cause of joy to all of us who are fighting the same battle against modernism. Unfortunately this one has been the cause of apprehension, owing both to the problems surrounding it and to the fact that it will likely be used as a pedestal for further attacks on other priests.

Enclosed is a list of facts about Bishop Mendez, entitled Notes on Bishop Mendez & An Episcopal Consecration. These are facts, and not mere hearsay. There is not a single fact on these pages that is not verified by eyewitnesses or by document.

I am sending you this information for a twofold purpose: (1) to set the record straight concerning Bishop Mendez and Fr. Kelly's alleged consecration, in the case that anyone should want to get involved in it; (2) to point out the lack of credibility of those who so vehemently attacked the consecrations done by Archbishop Thuc. For those who do the very things they condemn others for doing are not worthy of credibility.

Setting the Record Straight

As I said above, an impression is being given that Bishop Mendez was a saintly traditional bishop with a sterling theological, liturgical, and moral reputation. This allegation has been much touted, in order to present Fr. Kelly as someone who does not labor under the problems of those whose orders proceed from Archbishop Thuc. It is as if he is the "pure bishop," whereas others are "tainted bishops."

Here I will let the facts in the Notes speak for themselves. I believe that the reader will garner a somewhat different picture. What emerges from the page is a Novus Ordo bishop, not very edifying in his conduct, bizarre in many ways, but somewhat inclined toward traditional trappings owing to personal friendships with traditionalists. What emerges is a very worldly prelate who lives in fear of losing face with the Novus Ordo, and who even goes so far as to use a phony name, a phony identity by wearing lay clothes, ultra-secrecy and finally denial in order to remain on their good terms. Bishop Mendez' plan was successful: the Novus Ordo welcomed him as one of their own in the Arecibo cathedral.

The sins of the consecrator, to be sure, do not "migrate" to the person consecrated, contrary to what Fr. Kelly always has led one to believe. But I think that the faithful and prospective seminarians especially should be familiar with the lying, the secrecy, and cover-ups concerning Bishop Mendez' identity and background, as well as the problems surrounding proof of consecration and Mendez' mental capacity.

Lack of Credibility

The other reason for presenting these facts is to prove that those who have criticized the Thuc consecrations are not worthy of credibility. They are not worthy of credibility because they themselves have done the very thing which they condemn others for having done.

For example:

We all know that if any of these facts which are recounted concerning Bishop Mendez had been said of Archbishop Thuc, Fr. Kelly would ,H? them in hJJ? s?L??ammunition fG2�riticism. We would have never heard the end of it, if Archbishop Thuc's family said he was mentally impaired, or if six months after the consecration, his religious superior said that he thought he had Alzheimer's. We would have never heard the end of it, if Archbishop Thuc had used a phony name and then lied, in writing, about the consecrations which he did, referring to them as "ugly rumors." This information would have been plastered from one end of the country to the other, with the conclusion that these consecrations are doubtful, and we can have nothing to do with them. Yet when Fr. Kelly does it, and it is his episcopacy, the rules change, and he who criticizes it is accused of "malice." This is the height of hypocrisy.

Reaction of the Novus Ordo

Rev. James E. McDonald, C.S.C., the Provincial of the Holy Cross Fathers, writing for the Novus Ordo "Apostolic Nuncio" in Washington in a letter to a lay person, dated March 28, 1995, made the following comments:

In that last six years of his life Bishop Mendez was in extremely delicate and fragile physical and mental health. He was eighty-seven when he died and in the last several years suffered heart problems, strokes, and loss of memory. I believe that he may have been taken advantage of in these last years by the Society of Saint Pius V.

We are not prepared to say, and may never be prepared, to say whether he in fact ordained these people and whether he ordained them validly.

Now imagine if these things had been written about Archbishop Thuc, what Fr. Kelly would have said. He would have had the proverbial "field day" in using them to attack the consecrations done by Thuc. But when it concerns his alleged consecration, we are expected to ignore such comments. To me this is unheard-of hypocrisy.

Some Concluding Observations

Because of all of the deceit, cover-up, hypocrisy, phony names, and secrecy surrounding Bishop Mendez and those who participated in receiving orders from him, it is objectively difficult to prove that this consecration took place. Take a step back, for instance. Imagine if you did not know the personalities involved, but merely heard that in a foreign country, say Brazil, a very small and closed group of priests claimed that their leader was consecrated by an 86-year-old bishop, who was always seen in lay clothes because the mob was after him, who used a phony name, who hobnobbed with movie stars and frequented the gambling and showgirl hot spots, and who had had a stroke only two and a half weeks previous. They wait until the phony-named incognito bishop dies, and then announce it. The family testifies in court that the man was mentally impaired, and his religious superior says he thinks he had Alzheimer's. Would you want to get involved in something like that?

The question of Mendez' competency is serious. The testimony in favor of his competency would have to be very strong in order to dispel all serious doubt. It is true that the cognitive power necessary to perform a sacrament validly is easy to achieve: you simply have to know what you are doing and intend to do it. But for the record of posterity, will seminarians ever feel right about receiving orders from a bishop who was consecrated by an 86-year-old man, about whom it is said by eyewitnesses, under oath, that he was "mixed up" and thought to have had Alzheimer's?

What is equally serious is the bizarre episode, recounted by Fr. Zapp, an eyewitness, of Bishop Mendez' garbled pronunciation of the essential words at the 1990 ordination, and the bishop's impatience at having to re-do them. Why would he garble these words, when he had pronounced all the others properly? Priests slow down and pay attention to the essential words very carefully.

For the moment I reserve judgment about this consecration. I want to see all of the evidence before making a definitive judgment for my own conscience. But I already know, that no matter what I finally think about it, whether there is sufficient evidence or not to prove its fact or validity, it is something that I do not want to get involved in.

Notes on Bishop Mendez & an Episcopal Consecration

by Rev. Anthony Cekada

IN EARLY 1995 the Society of St. Pius V (SSPV) announced that the Rev. Clarence Kelly had been secretly consecrated a bishop on October 19, 1993 by the retired Bishop of Arecibo, Puerto Rico, the Most Rev. Alfred F. Mendez CSC, who died on January 28, 1995. This announcement occasioned many questions from traditional Catholics.

Rather than attempt a full-fledged article on this puzzling turn of events, we merely collated some notes and facts from various sources, and grouped them with the most commonly asked questions. For the most part, editorializing has been confined to the final section.

Who was Bishop Mendez ?

  1. A Holy Cross Father (the order that runs Notre Dame University.) Consecrated bishop 1960 for Arecibo, Puerto Rico.
  2. Retired early 1974. lived in Carlsbad CA, near San Diego. Died January 1995, age 87, Cincinnati.

How did he first get involved with Fr. Kelly & SSPV?

  1. His long-time secretary/housekeeper was Natalie White, writer of anti-Novus Ordo articles in 1960s.
  2. Miss White was a close friend of Fr. William Jenkins' parents, hence the initial connection.
  3. A number of American traditional priests in Pius X met Mendez in late 1970s. He talked a somewhat conservative line, but never did anything.

When he headed his diocese, was he an anti-Modernist like Archbishop Lefebvre?

  1. No. Evident from eulogy in his diocesan newspaper:
  2. As a priest in 1950s, Mendez promoted pre-Vatican II nuns' lib movement- sending sisters to study at Notre Dame where liberals would corrupt their faith.
  3. After Vatican II Uhe supported the initiatives of sisters who were looking for new horizons."
  4. In 1960, Mendez became first bishop in world to make a Cursillo "retreat." (Cursillo = political-religious movement which originated in Spanish-speaking countries before Vatican II. A leftist/modernist operation which used Communist mind-control/indoctrination techniques on participants: sleep deprivation, exhaustion, emotionalism, public confession of sins, group criticism of individual participants. Also notorious for gross liturgical abuses. Those involved in Cursillo became leaders of modernist program during and after Vatican II.)
  5. As a new bishop in 1961, Mendez "began the Cursillo movement in Puerto Rico, and he made the Diocese of Arecibo its pioneer."
  6. Mendez promoted other liberal initiatiives which would "laicize" Church and undercut priest's role. From beginning of Vatican II, "he dedicated himself to the restoration of the permanent [married] diaconate," and he "opened horizons and positions for the laity well before Vatican II ended."
  7. Was member of CELAM, leftist South American bishops' organization.

Was Bp. Mendez a traditionalist after he retired?

  1. Did weekend help-outs & weddings for Novus Ordo.
  2. Raised funds for ultra-Modernist Notre Dame University, celebrated public Masses there.
  3. In 1981-82, ordained priests at Notre Dame using new rite.
  4. Said mutilated Paul VI version of traditional Mass (parts missing), but even this only because of influence of his traditionalist housekeeper.
  5. Never took public stand against Novus Ordo and Vatican II.
  6. Is never once known to have offered old Mass in public at traditional chapel.
  7. Promoted compromise initiatives to pull traditional Catholics into Novus Ordo church: Indult Masses, special Tridentine Ordinariate under JP2, and Fraternity of St. Peter.
  8. At same time, also encouraged seminarians to join "conservative" Novus Ordo organizations such as Legionaires of Christ.
  9. Dressed in sport jacket, shirt with open collar and dark trousers when visiting the laity.
  10. Said he had to dress incognito because the mob was after him.
  11. In 1985 observed 50th ordination anniversary by being "principal concelebrant" of a Novus Ordo at Notre Dame.
  12. In 1989 sits silently by as Miss White and a visitor argue about the teachings of Fr. Leonard Feeney. Then the bishop informs his somewhat perplexed visitor: "She's a theologian."
  13. In June 1989, when told by traditional priest that traditionalists should not work with modernists, Mendez replied: Don't be against the new. Just be for the traditional."

Didn't Bp. Mendez show he was a traditionalist by ordaining two priests for SSPV in September 1990 ?

  1. Had no wish to be identified publicly as traditional Catholic or even associated with ceremony.
  2. Arrived, as usual, in lay clothes.
  3. Performed ordination ceremony in secret.
  4. Followed Novus Ordo rules and did not ordain candidates to subdiaconate before. (Subdiaconate is when seminarians take on celibacy obligation.)
  5. Refused to wear all the traditional vestments.
  6. Insisted ceremony not be videotaped: "Get that thing out of here!" When he arrived at Preface of Ordination, which contains the essential sacramental form, suddenly began racing through it so quickly that it was incomprehensible.|
  7. Became angry when asked to repeat essential part.
  8. Then repeated it in way that prompted following exchange: Fr. Kelly: "Did he get it right that time?" Fr. Thomas Zapp: "I think so." Ceremony continued on basis of "Think so."
  9. Fr. Zapp says he cannot vouch for certain that Mendez finally said essential words properly.
  10. Bishop's conduct during ceremony was such that afterwards in sacristy Fr. Kelly shook his head, told Fr. Zapp: "Never again. I'll never do this again."
  11. Mendez used a false name to disassociate himself from ordination: "Bishop Francis Gonzalez."
  12. lied and denied in writing that he performed ordination, calling it "an ugly rumor." (Letter to Fr. Scott, 17 October 1990)

Didn't this involvement with SSPV at least influence Bp. Mendez in a more traditional direction after 1990 ?

  1. We merely reproduce points from written accounts given by three traditional Catholics who had no axe to grind against the bishop. These accounts relate Mendez's actions and statements when he came to visit them in Detroit on July 1-3, 1992. Among other things, Bp. Mendez:
  2. Arrived dressed as layman (blue suit). Hinted he dressed this way because someone wanted to kill him. Dressed in lay clothes during entire visit.
  3. Said he wouldn't consecrate a bishop for SSPV, adding: "They should patch up their differences with the Society of St. Pius X, and Williamson can make them their bishop."
  4. For saying traditional Mass during visit, Mendez used no altar stone, no crucifix, no altar cloths, no amice, no cincture, no maniple, no stole, no chasuble, no chalice, no chalice veil, no Prayers at Foot of Altar, no Last Gospel, no linen purificator for Precious Blood (used paper towel). Vested a la Novus Ordo in only alb & stole. Used metal wedding souvenir cup for chalice, Vaseline jars for cruets. Handled hosts "like poker chips."
  5. Said that the vernacular Mass was for the poor, but that the Latin Mass was for the rich.
  6. Told a nun in traditional garb that her habit should be more simple," and said he favored short habits.
  7. Told nun he didn't want her to accompany him to airport lest be identified as a religious, much less a traditionalist.
  8. Said the Church "has too much doctrine," and that Fr. Sanborn pays too much attention to doctrine, "which is not so important."
  9. Mentioned how he went on cruises and serves as a chaplain "for all denominations."
  10. Proudly related how he lobbied bishops at Vatican II to approve married deacons.
  11. Volunteered to ordain his host a priest if his wife dies.
  12. Boasted about worldly Hollywood connections. Mendez himself related following anecdote: he went to a Las Vegas dinner dressed (as usual) in coat and tie. A few days later, he ran into actor Tony Curtis who was at the dinner. Seeing the bishop dressed for a change in a clerical collar, Mr. Curtis told him: 'I'm not the actor, Bishop! You are!"
  13. Sprinkled his conversation with hells and damns.
  14. Claimed he had a secret organization of priests numbering 300 to 400, and secret seminaries training priests to infiltrate the Vatican II church.
  15. Stated that Cardinal Ratzinger was really working for him (Mendez).
  16. Began to weep, and said that if God wanted him to admonish John Paul II, God would have to prove it with a miracle. Mendez thereupon asked a sister present to perform a miracle by lighting a candle miraculously &151; a request he repeated to her on two other occasions during his visit.
  17. Written comments in 1992 from horrified host and his wife, both long-time traditional Catholics, and both reliable and sensible people: "Mendez is a modernist bishop. He is aware of the traditionalists, but is very much in tune with the goings-on in the Novus Ordo Church." "I am in fear that the Bishop would not have the right intent mentally if he were to consecrate a priest [to be] a bishop today. There is not a traditional bone in his body. He is 100% liberal Novus Ordo. He is equal with my spiritually dead children who adore the world and all the evil in it."

There was a controversy surrounding Bp. Mendez's death. What were the details?

  1. In January 1995, Mendez came to Cincinnati where he saw a church property under consideration for purchase. During stay, bishop took ill, went into hospital, was released, died suddenly on Saturday, January 28, at age of 87.
  2. Because of their extensive involvement with him,. SSPV wanted to bury Mendez as if he were really a traditional Catholic. They hurriedly organized a traditional Requiem for Tuesday, and planned a quick burial at Fr. Kelly's convent in Round Top NY.
  3. Bishop laid out in SSPV school chapel in Cincinnati. Was first time he is known to have appeared in vestments at a public Mass in traditional Catholic chapel.
  4. Mendez's family strenuously objected, obtained an injunction against burial and instituted lawsuit (Laugier vs. Jenkins, Common Pleas, Hamilton Cy., A95-507, Judge Nay).
  5. Case heard February 7. Number of interesting points:
  6. Mendez's sister testified that Fr. Jenkins and Miss White (bishop's housekeeper, friend of Jenkins family) tried to keep family from seeing bishop. Also testified Miss White completely, took over bishop's life in later years. "She bossed him. Took care of everything. Disposed of his money. Disposed of everything."
  7. When Mendez visited relatives in Puerto Rico, every Mass he celebrated for them was in Spanish. His last visit there: April 1993. Bishop's family had doubts about Mendez's mental competency for period from October 1, 1993 onwards. On December 6, 1994, shortly before bishop's death, he signed new will making Fr. Kelly's group the beneficiary of his $1 million-plus fortune. On January 26, only two days before bishop's death, Fr. Kelly typed up a document for bishop to sign, requesting burial at Round Top. Judge said bishop's supposed signature looks like some sort of Japanese hieroglyphics to me." In decision, judge added: "If this were a probate court, I think the Probate Court may have said this was not knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily entered into. Could have been undue influence, could have been completely unappreciative of what he was doing; the word he was doing or anything else. As far as I'm concerned, Exhibit Number A is of no value to this Court." Judge gave bishop's family custody of body. On February 11, Mendez buried in Arecibo Cathedral with Novus Ordo.

When and how did SSPV announce that Bp. Mendez made Fr. Kelly a bishop?

  1. Announcement first made February 8.
  2. SSPV priests called special parish meetings at chapels to explain.
  3. Image of Mendez presented to laity: a traditionalist.
  4. Supposed proofs: Some correspondence between him and Lefebvre. Stories told of "signs from God" indicating consecration should proceed, angels singing before Mendez's death, and how his episcopal lineage can be traced to St. Pius X.
  5. Reaction: Some laymen quite uneasy. Suspect Mendez not really traditional, full story not being told.

What information has come out so far about the supposed consecration itself?

  1. Ceremony held October 19, 1993 at Mendez's house in Carlsbad CA.
  2. Was a secret ceremony held at altar set up in a bedroom.
  3. In addition to Mendez and Fr. Kelly, the 5 SSPV priests were present; apparently no one else.
  4. Photos taken, but no video.

Why was the consecration performed in Secret?

  1. Mendez wasn't really a traditional Catholic. Still believed in Vatican II church. Wanted to remain in good graces with Novus Ordo colleagues. Had he acted publicly, Novus Ordo hierarchy would have declared him excommunicated.
  2. Also, had consecration been public and announced while Mendez was alive, faithful in SSPV chapels would have wanted to meet the heroic prelate who honored their leader. But had devout lay people encountered at any great length the reality of the Novus Ordo Mendez (rather than the image presented after his demise), they would have been horrified.

Did Bp. Mendcz issue a proper certificate?

  1. SSPV circulated five different accounts or documents:
  2. First, SSPV informed laity that Mendez issued a certificate &151; but that he signed it "Gonzalez."
  3. Second, document headed "Si Diligis Me." Mendez states he conferred episcopal consecration, but does not identify who he consecrated, nor where and how.
  4. Third, 20 October 1993 document titled "Attestation of Episcopal Consecration." Appears to be signed by Mendez, and says he consecrated Fr. Kelly. Also signed by Frs. Jenkins and Skierka who attest that Mendez signed document.
  5. Fourth, 10 November 1993 document, with slightly different title: "Declaration of Episcopal Consecration." Appears to be signed by Mendez. Text similar, but not identical to document three. Signature witnessed by house-keeper Miss White, (!) Frs. Jenkins & Baumberger.
  6. Fifth, 20 October 1993 Latin document apparently signed by Mendez, but neither witnessed nor bearing a visible seal. Text was from a priestly ordination certificate, doctored up for the occasion.
  7. None of the documents attest (as Fr. Kelly earlier claimed was necessary to accept validity of a "secret" consecration) that "due matter and form" were used, that "qualified witnesses" to the rite were present, etc.
  8. Successive appearance of five different accounts or documents seems rather fishy, particularly given fuss Fr. Kelly made over documentation of Thuc consecrations. Are some documents "improved" versions, formulated under technicalities of mental reservation? It is fair to wonder.

Why was there no video?

  1. Fr. Jenkins stated that events developed quickly and that there was no time to arrange for one.
  2. Explanation doesn't seem credible. All you needed was camera and videocassette.
  3. More reasonable to believe that SSPV feared video would demonstrate either that (1) Mendez did not act like a traditional Catholic clergyman, or (2) at time of the consecration there was evidence of mental impairment. (See below.)

Fr. Kelly made many charges against the Thuc consecrations. Couldn't these same charges also be made against his own?

  1. First objection of Fr. Kelly against Thuc consecrations: charge that they were supposedly always open to question because they were "secret." Also claimed they were performed under "sordid" circumstances which de-meaned the sacrament.
  2. Fr. Kelly's consecration: Performed in secret in a chapel set up in a bedroom.
  3. Fr. Kelly subsequently claimed main reason for considering Thuc consecrations "dubious" was that Thuc never issued a proper certificate. (Claim forgotten when Latin certificate written out in Thuc's own hand was produced.)
  4. Fr. Kelly's consecration: Five different documents, none with identical contents, one signed with a false name, none of them meeting criteria Fr. Kelly claimed were necessary to accept validity.
  5. Other charges from Fr. Kelly: Thuc had unsavory connections, was supposedly not traditional Catholic.
  6. Fr. Kelly's consecrator, Bp. Mendez: Connections with Cursillo, Notre Dame, sundry Novus Ordo organizations. Public and private celebrations of Novus Ordo, said mutilated version of traditional Mass. Big on married deacons, nuns' lib, shortened habits, wearing lay clothes, interdenominational chaplaincy, Hollywood, and being "for the traditional," but not "against the new."

In Fall 1993, Fr. Kelly began publishing a multi-part article, attacking Abp. Thuc's competency. What of the "mental state" of Bp. Mendez?

  1. Should be noted, first of all, that Fr. Sanborn published sworn testimony from Thuc's friends and enemies alike, all of whom unanimously attested to Thuc's complete competence.
  2. Members of Mendez's own family, however, testified under oath in court that they believed bishop's competence was questionable after October 1, 1993.
  3. Court testimony: From Oct. 1-11, 1993 Mendez was in San Diego hospital for stroke, pneumonia, operation. Unconscious for 5 days.
  4. Mendez's sister visited him in hospital in October 1993. Testified Mendez didn't recognize her for 3 days. After that: "Then he recognized me, and he didn't recognize me. It was so funny. He was mixed up." "Afterwards he went, and then they took him out of the hospital, and they would not let me go near him or anything."
  5. Consecration took place October 19, 1993, only 8 days after Mendez released.
  6. In spring 1994, Fr. Ebey, Provincial of Holy Cross Fathers, visited Mendez in California. He testified: "I found the Bishop to be very confused, I thought it could be Alzheimer's. I'm of course, not a doctor and not eligible to make medical opinions, but I do have memories of my family who have suffered from this; and I was worried about it."
  7. Fr. Ebey also phoned Mendez in November, 1994: "I can tell you he was confused in November of 1994."

    Testimony of Mendez grandnephew: He visited bishop in January 1995. "It was difficult and unsettling to have to continuously remind a person who he was and who his family was; and how he used to visit them... I knew he was in ill physical and mental state, definitely .... I just didn't think he was all there... Well, I would say that even after spending an hour, hour and a half there, he, you know, may have remembered my name after repeating to him enough times."
  8. No motive for family or Fr. Ebey to lie about Mendez's mental state. They all testified before Fr. Kelly's consecration revealed. Further, grandnephew stated that family had no interest in bishop's will.
  9. Other strange behavior before this period: In 1992 Mendez visit to traditionalist family in Detroit, odd business about "miracle of the candle," strange statements (assassinations, secret networks, etc. During same visit (at age 85), Mendez asked to be taken to restaurant for cocktails and dancing with his host's wife, whom he just met, and whom he addressed as "Honey" and "Dear." Constantly pointed out beautiful women in airport and during a visit to a mall. Talked about how many good-looking women there were in his visits to Las Vegas. Made a scandalous comment to a girl in a travel agency. Hosts were appalled.

    Strange behavior/obsessions of this type (sexual) sometimes appear in older men losing control of faculties.

    Consider what SSPV's advice to the laity would have been, had even half the foregoing been said of Abp. Thuc.
  10. Sad but ironic. Accusation Fr. Kelly falsely made against "mental state" of Thuc now boomerangs against Mendez, Fr. Kelly's own supposed consecrator.

So is it "Bishop" Kelly now? What about his future confirmations and priestly ordinations? Should we consider them valid or not?

  1. As noted in discussion of Thuc consecrations, it doesn't take much to consecrate a bishop validly. One must objectively and fairly apply the same principles to this case.
  2. But must admit that there is a real problem here: Mendez family members testified there was competence question from Oct. 1, 1993. Consecration took place on Oct. 19.
  3. May indeed happen now that someone will challenge Mendez will. If after lengthy battle over estate, judge some day rules Mendez legally incompetent during period, validity of Fr. Kelly's consecration then open to question. Then also his ordinations, confirmations.
  4. Advisable therefore that potential seminarians and recipients of confirmation defer receiving Holy Orders, Confirmation, until issue of Mendez's competency is resolved.

An Analysis

IT IS NO SECRET that Fr. Kelly, Fr. Jenkins and SSPV have attacked the Thuc consecrations and sown much division in traditional Catholic circles over the issue. SSPV also implemented a policy of refusing Holy Communion to any layman known to have received sacraments from clergy affiliated with bishops in the Thuc line. This stirred up much ill will and coundess conflicts among families, friends and individuals.

Fr. Kelly, Fr. Jenkins and SSPV, it now appears, have done exactly those things for which they denounced the Thuc consecrations and refused laymen the sacraments. It is a double standard at best. Many already call it hypocrisy.

Even laymen consistently loyal to SSPV have picked up on this. Thuc is condemned and Mendez excused, both for the same thing. SSPV's explanations of how this could be so, even to lay ears unattuned to the nuances of church law, smack of a cover-up and all sound slightly phony. Understandably, people are profoundly uneasy.

Old-timers in the Mount St. Michael group recalled their own experiences 25 years ago, and drew parallels between Fr. Kelly's consecration and that of Francis Schuckardt a hurriedly organized secret ceremony, the surprise revelation of a consecration, a consecrator with a less than sterling background &151; and above all, the expectation that lay followers would ignore the obvious problems and un-questioningly follow the group's leader.

Laymen who have no alternative but an SSPV chapel should not allow themselves to be stampeded into accepting the unacceptable. For them, passive resistance, polite avoidance of cooperation or involvement, and a discreet and gradual withdrawal of material and moral support may be the most prudent course.

Finally, rather than engage in endless polemics over the Mendez affair, let us be realistic. Bp. Mendez was merely the proverbial "nice guy" who wanted to do someone a favor and help out. While he had some "conservative" inclinations, he was certainly not a traditional Catholic. Personal ties, impulse, and genuine charitable sentiments &151; rather than any clear conviction &151; prompted him to perform an ordination for SSPV in 1990. He was dependent in his old age on someone with close ties to SSPV (Miss White) and hence susceptible to "influence." SSPV thus ended up attempting to make him into what they needed, but what Bp. Mendez himself never really was.

The story, in the final analysis, is one of ambition gone awry, needs dictating principles, and ends justifying means. It happens every day in the marketplace, in politics.., and, unfortunately, also in religion. Be warned.
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1