Come Clean And Save Your Souls - II

Prax Maskaren. Letter to Robert Chung, Hans Lorenz, Wen Cheng, etc., about the Pius XIV affair.
16^th April 2003. Revised 18^th April 2003.
Dear Brothers Robert Chung, (Hans Lorenz & Wen Cheng).

This is further to your letter of yesterday, 15th April 2003.

I ask you to take care of your health: physical, mental and spiritual, for you are a young man who can be of great use to the Church in the propagation and defence of the faith.

I have the need to balance Charity and Prudence and to be entirely honest I am not entirely convinced by your account. The account you give is nearly exhaustive, but there are still loose ends, and I also still have my doubts.

On the one hand there is the clear need to Charity, on the other hand there is the just as clear need to continue to be wary and on the alert, so as to frustrate any effort, if so, for mischief and to seduce souls away from the faith.

But let us take first things first.

Years ago, when I turned from atheism to Christianity and began to study the Catholic faith, I had been put in charge of the parish library. In the months following, a group of youth, more or less interested in religion, gravitated around me.

We were some six: myself, Richard Fernandes, Savio Rodrigues, George Pereira, Joseph George Puttanparambil, Rajesh William de Souza. We were all ethnic Konkani, the predominant Christian community in Bombay. However, Joseph was a Keralite, and an immigrant into the city from his native province in the far south. It was I who took the initiative to make him welcome in the group. At the same time, we were still finding our feet, and I was progressing in my understanding of the 'crisis', which understanding eventually propelled me outside what I soon came to recognize as a sect, not the Catholic Church.

However, before that had happened, I began to pick up body language that there was something wrong and that Joseph was at the center of it. I asked him what was on, and after prodding he admitted that he was not convinced of Catholicism, and that he was looking at the sects. And the others were going along with him.

Some months later I found that Joseph had been a regular member of a particularly vicious sect, the Worldwide Church of God, founded by a particularly rabid madman, Herbert Armstrong, for quite some time, and that he had been indoctrinating the others, so much so that he had practically succeeded in gaining over George Pereira. That made me blow my fuse. I confronted him and demanded an explanation, pointing out that he had behaved dishonestly, that he had abused my friendship and my hospitality on behalf of the Church to the use of the parish library to promote clandestinely another religion, and one that is virulently hostile to his hosts. That was bad faith.

In retaliation, Joseph said that I was traumatizing him, became emotional and said that he was entirely giving up religion and faith in Jesus Christ. I pointed out that he was being irrational: If he had a problem because of me, it was with me, not with Christ. Therefore, he should, rationally, avoid me, not Christ and Christianity; this was just emotionalism and emotional blackmail.

Today, I am facing the same situation, and I get the feeling of d�j� vu.

We are here and do what works we voluntarily engage ourselves in, not because we wish to please any particular friend, acquaintance, etc., or because we have been commanded by some human in authority or because it is our employment, but because we believe that it is necessary to do so, so as to further the Kingdom of God and the fulfilment of His Positive Will on earth. So, even though we may encounter dangers and difficulties and even the fiercest oppositions, we must continue insouciant, if we are honest about our motives, trying new and different tacks to gain our ends, according to experience and necessities. But, if we give way in the face of opposition or the failure to make headway, then we necessarily admit, at least as a possibility, that our causes are false.

Therefore, I regret the claims being put forward that because of the resistance and opposition that you face, you to no longer wish to continue with your work.

Certainly, as far as Chung is concerned, I do not accept blame for turning him off his 'mission' such as it is. And I do not appreciate the suggestion that either because of my 'scorning' or the activities of any other person or group, he no longer wishes to follow his mission.

Such an attitude is entirely illegitimate.

Worse, Chung says that because he is 'alienated', he considers going away entirely to the "Old Catholics" or some other sect. This is even more illegitimate and is purely emotional blackmail.

One's soul is not a toy to cast about. One's salvation is not a plaything.

Men do not run from the spotlight or dive for cover when opposition comes their way. Least of all, do Christ's ambassadors hide and run away from the fight! If your causes are true and you sincerely believe them, I say, fight on, plod on, strive on!

Pardon the blunt talk, but I think that it is necessary. It is a positive danger to start sympathizing with oneself and to allow oneself to labour under a persecution complex. That, Robert, is what I meant by 'whining.'

[It seems that your emotional trauma precipitated your physical ailment, making it a psychosomatic disorder. I would advice you to take things cool and to relax, to face things with a relaxed mind. Believe me, the sky is NOT going to fall down upon your head!]

But, just as Gordon Bateman pursues his mission, that of bringing unity among the Sedevacantists and Conclavists factions so as to accomplish the unity of the Church and to facilitate its restoration, and just as Robert Chung claims that he too is motivated by the need to the same end, so also I too have my cause, my motivations and my mission.

My mission is, in its ends, the same. However, in incidentals, it is different. I have gone beyond seeking to facilitate Ecumenism among 'Traditionalists' - admittedly a nigh impossible objective, but to rally souls to the one man who is, by Catholic theology, beyond any doubts, the true and legitimate pope.

Mr. Bateman has his reserves on Mr. Bawden. I say that those are without ground. It does not matter at all that most or very many refuse to assent to Bawden. What matters is that his claim is entirely according to the laws, principles, etc., of the Catholic Faith.

At times, the faithful were deceived and confused between two or more claimants to the Papacy. In today's situation, the issue is as clear as daylight, the matter is open to investigation and proof and so there is no cause for confusion: There was one entirely legitimate election when the Papacy was demonstrated to be incontrovertibly vacant, and so the electee became legitimate pope. But a subsequent second and even third election was attempted without giving reasons for considering the first election null and void, and so they are utterly without any merit. There is no ground for obfuscation, whatsoever.

In the final count, what matters is not what kind of person and or temperament (kind, harsh, charitable, etc.) that the true Pope has, or whether my neighbour rallied to him or not, but whether I did.

Again, I would like to point out to Mr. Bateman that the 'Traditionalists' such as they are, and mainly, but not exclusively the clergy, are very comfortable with their situation as it is with them just now, and do not wish to be disturbed or be forced to make sacrifices, etc. Therefore they are loath to give up their comfortable existence and admit the claim of Mr. Bawden to be the pope.

When I learnt the latest about the Pius XIV affair, two things infuriated me.

Firstly, despite having exposed this claim, that of Pius XIV as being a fraud, its perpetrators continued with their mischief. Moreover, Traditionalists whom I had warned also continued, to my dismay, to treat with these people on a serious basis.

My second objection was to the involvement of an unreformed Dollingerite. I do not admit the legitimacy of the involvement of Dollingerites or Feeneyites or any other spiritual foreigners; any sectarians.

I have read with interest Mr. Bateman's history of Mr. Hans Lorenz, and how he came to become a Dollingerite. However, it remains that Hans Lorenz is not a Dollingerite merely for opportunistic reasons, such as to gain sacerdotal and episcopal orders, but that he actually believes the "Old Catholic" line.

That is evident enough from his letter to me, and from Fr. Cekada's article on this complex of conjoint sects, which demonstrates beyond doubt that Lorenz's language in his letter to me is integrally "Old Catholic." I had asked Lorenz for a clarification after he wrote me the first time, but he did not bother, leaving me to confirm my conclusions.

Another thing: I do not appreciate Chung's emotionalist talk about being willing to junk Pius XIV but taking offence at any attack on Lorenz.

If Pius XIV had been elected in good faith and put forward his claim in good faith, there is no reason to be ashamed of him. Ignorance does not make one a charlatan. But there is little good that can be said about Lorenz, at least from the viewpoint of the Catholic faith. And that will remain so until Lorenz openly abjures the "Old Catholic" lines and unconditionally adopts the Catholic line.

For the sake of his salvation and for the edification of the faithful and of the Church, I ask Mr. Lorenz to do so immediately. I do not see that there is anything that can keep Mr. Lorenz back from doing the right thing and doing it promptly.

Coming to the heart of the problem with Robert Chung: Let me be very blunt and speak honestly: I am not at all convinced that you, Robert Chung, are telling the entire and unvarnished truth. I see too many inconsistencies, too many glaring gaps, too many incongruencies, etc.

Let me elaborate.

Robert Hess who operates the St. Francis newsletter website, says that the Pius XIV group gave him information that Pius XIV was Bishop Zhong Huai-de Joseph who was elected pope in 1998 and died in 2002 in Formosa.

Previously, Wen Cheng had informed the St. Gabriel's list that Pius XIV was Fr. Robert Zhong, S.J. Obviously, there is a contradiction. It is impossible that Pius XIV could be both Robert Zhong and Zhong Huai-de Joseph.

Further, after searching under that name (Zhong Huai-de Joseph) I found, from Terrence Boyle's site on Bishops Vagrants that Zhong or Zong Huai-de Joseph was an Underground Bishop in China PRC who defected to the domesticated, puppet sect, the Patriotic Association, and who moreover died in 1997.

I wish to know the source, the identity of the person who provided information about the Pius XIV claim to Robert Hess of the St. Francis newsletter, and of the person, a follower or partisan of Pius XIV who asked him to pull off this information.

Again, Robert Chung now claims that the geocities site had been created by him and others to propagate the Rosary; that an associate turned against him and created a bogus site to put out false information, etc.

I have serious problems with that account. It does not square.

For starters, I ask on what basis was Robert Cheng made Papal Secretary to Pius XIV post-mortem, whether by Wen Cheng, or whoever?

Then again, there is the plain and incontrovertible fact that the principal person who put up the Petition is in fact Wen 'Cardinal' Cheng, and his email, as credited by the Petitiononline administrators, is the same which he used to communicate with Sedevacantist Unity (St. Gabriel).

Next, Chung claims that someone, most probably a "David Milne," is the sponsor of the Petitiononline petition. Chung also claims that a renegade former associate had created a false geocities account to misrepresent both Pius XIV and himself (Robert Cheng).

I ask one simple question: How is it that Robert Cheng regained control over the very same site so that he could use it to store his two MS Word document that were his school notes?

In contrast to Chung's account, the Petitiononline petition identifies Wen 'Cardinal' Cheng and his email account, [email protected], the very same email account that was used to communicate with Traditionalist Sedevacantists and Conclavists. Additionally, the website address attributed by Petitiononline is the same http://www.geocities.com/holycatholic_2000

This is another story that does not jell.

I too use a Geocities account, and believe me, from practical experience, I know that if I ask Geocities to delete even my own site, they will NOT! I have to do it myself, physically.

This is something that has actually happened to me. Because of a breach of security (someone, somehow, got my password) and my email accounts were being misused to put out pornography and other garbage, etc., I hastily changed my passwords twice, the second time after the first change did not stop the mischief. And in doing so, I forgot the new changed password for my main site http://www.geocities.com/Orthopapism (or it was stolen and altered by the malefactor?) so that I no longer control that site. And despite repeated efforts to regain the password or to have the site deleted, Geocities will not cooperate with me. I do not blame them! I have also forgotten my original security questions and other security information, unfortunately!

The loss of this site, since mid-October or November 2002, is a great loss to me, it having being my favourite site of operations and the loss still rankles.

Therefore, in sum, there remain outstanding too many discrepancies and inconsistencies, which need to be resolved.

Now let me set out what I think is the truth, what I surmise.

I suspect that, as a young man, unfortunately, Robert Chung is or was not able to separate his fantasies from reality, for which reason this situation came to pass.

I surmise that this Pius XIV claim started out as a internal mental fantasy on the part of Robert Chung, and that he allowed it to grow and even put up his claim in the real world, in his school, among his classmates and friends' circle, on the net, etc., still half joke, half wishing it were real. Then he accidentally found about the traditionalist movement and the Conclavist movement, found it incredulous and ridiculous that such a small number of people should reject the New Religion and claim to be the continuation of the Catholic Faith as against the majority, and even to attempt to elect a pope, and he thought to latch on, make fun of, and bring about the accession, most probably as a joke, of Conclavists to his claim.

I believe that Robert Chung used the name Robert Borgia for fun. And that it is entirely possible that he may be having relatives with the Zhong surname.

Latter, as things started to get more complicated, he modified the claim to change the identity of the person who was being projected as Pius XIV from Fr. Robert Zhong, S.J. to Bishop Zhong Huai-de Joseph, consciously or unconsciously taking the name of a 'Patriotic' bishop about whom he had probably heard of, and who interested him because they possibly shared the same basic surname. Up until this time, the claim was still a joke.

Somewhere down the line, he came in contact with Hans Lorenz, that he came to see Hans Lorenz as a more mature and experienced man interested in the same type of things. Therefore, Robert Chung decided to make way for his newfound guru, Hans Lorenz.

It is for this reason that the claim was further modified to kill off the non-existing Pius XIV, and to prepare the way for a conclave to elect a successor, with the intention to manipulate Hans Lorenz into that position.

I am convinced that there IS a Wen Cheng, and that he is very much alive, that he is indeed just a pagan or non-Catholic, that he is not going 'green in the brains,' but that he merely stopped being amused by the joke or wish to continue with it when it started getting complicated, etc., and refused to continue to be associated with this thing.

It is probable that Robert Chung turned to Lorenz even more because he came into his life just as Wen Cheng abandoned him.

I am very certain that it is that Lorenz took the initiative to come into Chung's life, and that it was not Chung who sought out Lorenz.

In the seeking of this objective, it would be a great ego boost to kid along David Bawden, Gordon Bateman and the Mildenhalls, and gaining their support in their ignorance and gullible charity.

Now, given that this entire plan has been thrown off gear and exposed, Robert Chung gets emotional and accuses me of traumatizing him and of bringing upon him or aggravating a medical ailment.

While I sympathize with the grief, embarrassment and pain that Robert feels, I still am not convinced that he is, even now, on the up and the straight.

But this is a matter that can be easily proved one way or the other.

I suggest that if you (Robert Chung) are honest about all this, that you address letters to Robert Hess and to Petitiononline using the same email identity of "Papal Secretary" and instructing them to reveal the pages and correspondence exchanged on Pius XIV and the source of information, endorsing copies of the same letters to us.

On the contrary, if what I surmise is the truth is in fact true, then I would suggest to Robert that it is time for him to stop playing games with himself and with us, swallow the bitter pill and come clean.

Coming clean will have a cathartic effect: It will hurt to admit the truth, but in the long run, it will benefit, and benefit greatly.

But if Robert insists that what he has stated as yet is the truth, the full truth and the unvarnished and complete truth, then I too am willing to let things rest at this.

But when I say that I will allow things to rest, I do not say that I will accept this claim as being the truth and let go of it. It would be dishonest of me to force myself to overlook my doubts and my suspicions and to be gullible. And it would be dishonest of me to pretend that I would let go of things in this unsatisfactory manner. That I will not do.

But I will continue to monitor your activities with a wary eye.

Let me assure you, Robert, that I am not at all an important person, leastways in my own estimation. I simply think that it is my obligation to keep an eye open to obvious wrongdoing and possible harm to souls, in so far as it is in my power to do so.

But you must fear God. God loves you, but His love is NOT unconditional. This is true whether for you or for me. I can defend the faith as a great warrior, discomfiting enemies of the Faith, but if I am a sinner and die in sin, I shall certainly be lost.

And He hates untruth and deceit above most other things. I can only think of homosexuality and the worship of false deities that more offend Him.

Therefore, I suggest that you not bother about the embarrassment that you might face before men, but that you should bother only about the embarrassment that you might face before God. Believe me, when face to face with God, the word 'embarrassment' would be a gross understatement.

But it is an act of courage to come clean.

The evil, materialistic and godless world punishes, mocks, scorns and ostracizes one who sincerely confesses wrongdoing. But the man who courageously confesses to wrongdoing and undoes his wrong, is a brave and courageous man who should not only not be punished but who should be applauded for his courage and for reforming and ceasing his wrongdoing.

You are a young man. And you have a lifetime ahead of you. You can either misuse your future to do evil and to perpetrate mischief, or you can join up together with others, young and old, men and women, who, though we are small in number, do the Will of God and strive to establish, restore and secure His Kingdom according to His Will and command.

Therefore, I earnestly implore and beseech you to seriously and honestly reconsider.

I will pray for you, though I am a weak man and a great sinner, and I ask that you pray for me, that I be made strong.

Your brother in Christ Jesus,

Prax Maskaren
This letter was not sent because of the trauma and distress that Robert Chung was undergoing. I asked some persons who had been involved with Chung whether I should send it, and three out of four said no, while the fourth has not replied. [See preview]

Since I am not enamoured with the desire to be seen as a heartless persecutor, I too am content to let things stand as they are, although, to be very frank, I am very far from being satisfied.