Randall Stocks
aka
"Fr. Ryan St. Anne"

CAUTION: THIS PAGE IS STILL IN DRAFT STAGE!

1. That Randall Scott is listed by any directory / list is no evidence that the creators of those directories are in league with any alleged criminal activities on his part. Yet, that is what Tomko implies.



2. There is no evidence that Tomko attempted to get Scott's version; that is a sin against Charity - and Justice!



3. Tomko directly judges and passes sentence on Scott ("Fr. Ryan... proves them wrong", etc), which it is not in her competence to do. She can only adduce evidence, and only when the evidence is conclusive can she draw conclusions.



4. The facts she alleges are seriously contradictory. If INA-Today is correct, Scott moved from Kucera to the Prairie Shrine; UnityPublishing.com's "Newsletter of Discernment" alleges that Scott, who was already at the Prairie Shrine, began to minister to Kucera's group out of the Shrine. Which is true? From the internal logic of the comparative documents, it seems that the second version is true. And if that is so, then the first version, that reproduced from the INA-Today (Westerman's) is pure slander and libel.



5. There is an idiotic attempt to tar Scott by association with Kucera. There is no evidence presented of collusion between Scott and Kucera. Kucera had Scott come in to minister to his group's needs - which is not evidence of any kind of a collusion, or of Scott's participation in the alleged sodomism of Kucera!



6. That Scott was ordained by the Old Catholics is apparently a misrepresentation of the facts; from what I understand from the accounts, it seems that a Bishop Byrne ordained Scott, and that Scott then, because of the doubts cast on his ordination at the hands of Scott, procured re-ordination from the Old Catholics.



7. It is a grievous sin-slander, libel and calumny to allege that someone is not in communion with Rome because he has refused to communicate with some sect that operates out of Rome. Traditionalists, like me, do not communicate with the Modernist sect, yet we affirm the Rome that the Modernists have abandoned. The Modernists represent Antirome-the Rome of the Pagans, of the Caesars, of the heretics, schismatics, neo-pagans, etc.; we the Catholics represent Saint Rome-the Rome of those who adhere to the God of Israel.



8. According to the Catholic Church, defective rites cannot make priests. This is as true of the Edwardian Ordinal of the Anglicans, as it is of the Montini Ordinal of 1969. Men ordained under it remain what they were before this false ceremony. A priest consecrated under it remains only a priest. Is Burke a bishop? Or is he merely a priest?
   
   If it can be said that Scott is "impersonating" a Catholic priest, what can we say of Mr. Burke himself? People who live in glass houses oughtn't to cast stones at others....



9. From the links provided, there is no evidence that Scott has made any kind of allegation against Fr. Burke. The only allegation that I can find is that from Unity Publishing, which quotes Paul Bergman that Scott alleged that he was raped by some twelve priests in a locked cathedral.... Tomko, incredibly, passes over this in silence.
   
   Did this happen? I do not know. I cannot know. Is it probable? Certainly. I can believe this, and far worse from a sect - the Roman Modernist - with the track record it has.
   
   [I am dealing right now with a group of former Charismatics, the nuns of which congregation were raped in front of the founder by goons sent by the diocesan "bishop" of the Antichurch, in part of a campaign to intimidate the lay patrons to make over the trust and its property - given to this congregation, to him (the "bishop").]

http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/MarvinKucera.html.

It is a very strange fact that this page does not name its author(s). One seeks in vain for a suggestion anywhere in the page as to who may have written it. Why is that so? Is the author too cowardly to add his own name to his letter? What reliance can be had in such an unsigned letter? Whom do we approach for corroboration of this account? What motivates this coyness?

From this Document it is evident that Kucera claimed to be a Seer, and one of the very many who claimed to be in continuation of Medjugorje. I myself look upon any apparition and or private revelation as being suspect until certified by the Magisterium. Obviously, I do not accept the authority of any sect and its governors, even if that sect simulates the Catholic Church by usurping its headquarters in Rome. [I reject out-of-hand, any suggested apparition or revelation made to schismatics, such as Medjugorje, Bayside, Necedah, etc.]

The Anonymous Author makes a cowardly and despicable attempt to confuse and misinform the reader by implying some connection between Kucera and the Charismatic Renewal. It is true enough that the Charismatic Renewal in the Roman Modernist sect began with some of the faculty and their students at the Duquesne University receiving a "Spirit" by the laying on off hands by a Protestant woman "minstress". That violates the Catholic law against "Communicatio in Sacris" - forbidding Catholics the participation in unlawful rites. But there is no parallel, as far as I can see, between this event and Steve Barham laying his hands on Kucera [I will admit that I am not aware as to who Steve Barham is, and that I am not familar with what "the spirit of Gospa" is all about].

Kucera may have been all that Anonymous alleges him to be: convicted for two felonies - indecent solicitation and embezzlement, and an admitted homosexual. But that is before his "conversion", regardless of the sincerity or alleged insincerity of this "conversion." But Anonymous is dishonest and vindictive when he alleges that Kucera's conversion was make-believe, and that he continued in his former sins. That constitutes the grave sin of slander and calumny, and is entirely contemptible.

The allegations that Kucera "never had any intention of doing anything except to con people out of their land and money, and to become a god in the process" is not borne by the Paul Bergman account and is unwarranted slander. What the Bergman account does prove is that Kucera was a fool and imprudent, and that he and Scott beat around the bush when they should have been upfront.

That Kucera may have been given to rants and raves (Anonymous himself seems to be pretty good at that) proves nothing more than that he was intemperate and incapable of self-control, which, while being in itself a very dangerous fault, is not evidence of anything else other than that he is intemperate and incapable of self-control. Certainly, it is not evidence that "he never had any intention of doing anything except to con people out of their land and money, and to become a god in the process".

Anonymous makes a long spiel about the theology of Marvin Kucera ("The Messages of the Spirit of Marvin"). Some of Anonymous' grievances are correct, but others are seriously wrong.

1. Question: Is Antichrist already on earth?
   
   Answer: We do not know.



2. Question: Is the Vatican filled with Evil Forces?
   
   Answer: Can any sane and honest man doubt that, since late October 1958, the Vatican has been hijacked by Satan? And how is this "postulation" impossible in Catholic Theology?
   
   Was not Rome hijacked for more than a decade under Pierleoni, the Antipope "Anacletus 2", who opposed Pope Innocent II?
   
   Was not Rome hijacked for about two years by atheists and Freemasons during the "Roman Republic" when Pope Pius IX was forced into exile at Gaeta?



3. Question: Can Peter's line be broken?
   
   Answer: Impossible. Catholic Theology categorically rules this out. The impossibility of the line being broken however, is not the same as the denial by some persons, evidently retarded, that the Papacy cannot be vacant for certain periods, even extended periods, or the equally retarded assertion or pretension that such vacancies render the election of the next pope impossible.



4. I know nothing about any Magisterial pronouncement about any of Anonymous' "104 true and approved prophets and mystics that the Antichrist cannot come until there is a chastisement on earth in which 75% of the world will die", whether severally or collectively, the 104 of them. I would certainly like to know about this. I am aware of certain alleged prophecies made by certain saints, to such effect, but as far as I know, they fall in the category of Private Revelation, nor do I know of Official Approbation of any of these.
   
   Anonymous' seems to contradict Christ and the Bible. Our Lord said that no man will know the exact time of His return. Yet, if Anonymous is right, we CAN know: We add up "Time of Chastisement" (3 days & nights?), 40 years of Peace; and 3.5 years of Antichrist's rule, and hey presto, we've got the time of the Second Coming! And what becomes of the element of surprise and uncertainty? Into the dustbin?
   
   May I ask: What is the authority for the APOCRYPHAL Prophecies of Malachy, which evidently falls into the category of purported Private Revelation? How does this stand with the Magisterium?



5. Anonymous tells us that "Where the bishop is - there is God�s people. Where the bishop is not - there is not God�s people" - Does he mean that we must therefore cling to the Anglican bishops, or to the Jacobite bishops, or to the Byzantine bishops? Evidently, St. Clement excludes heretical and schismatic bishops. That means that when we Catholics reject the heretical and schismatic bishops of the Modernists, of "Vatican 2", and their Antipope John-Paul 2, we do not thereby depart in schism.



6. Anonymous' biggest theological goof-up is his insistence that Christ is present in the churches (temples) of his sect. Does Anonymous know anything of Catholic Theology, except the words "Catholic Theology"? Does he know that invalid matter or form does not confect the Sacrament? Does he know of Pope Leo's Apostolicae Curae, which is only a quite recent Magisterial reiteration of a Catholic Theological point that Popes and the Magisterium have stressed from time immemorial?



7. Obedience to one's lawful superiors, even when they are sinful, is obligatory, as taught by Catholic theology. Anonymous confuses sinful superiors with former superiors who defected due to heresy. Catholic Theology forbids these latter any obedience at the penalty of schism.

The allegation that Kucera is a "computer hacker", presented without any supporting evidence, is purely slander and calumny.

That a man revamps computers is not evidence of his being a hacker; that a man alleges this of another is evidence of his own malice....

Anonymous himself alleges that Kucera, long before the Jobe-Bergman episodes at Snowflake, had made it clear that he did not accept the authority of Anonymous' sect's "bishops". Let us quote Anonymous:

"Marvin... advocated that we not obey bishops and priests who are not teaching Marv�s doctrine, and that on the 24th of February, 1993 there would be a great sign in the sky."

Evidently, then, Kucera stated his position publicly BEFORE 1993. And Mrs. Jobe made her donation on 31st May 1996. Is there any ground for alleging misrepresentation by Kucera to Mrs. Jobe and her brother, Paul Bergman?

We have only the courageous (sic!) account of Anonymous, quoting Paul Bergman, that Kucera and Scott equivocated when Paul Bergman challenged them on the jurisdiction question. If it is true that they equivocated, then they did wrong. Scott, at least, had the obligation to state upfront, at every opportunity, that he did not accept and recognize the authority of any sect, whether that headed in LaCrosse by Mr. Raymond Burke, or by anyone else.

From the Catholic Theological viewpoint, Scott also did serious wrong by associating with Kucera, who was part of the false, un-Catholic tradition of Medjugorje. Yet, even here, there is leeway due to ignorance.

Yet, I stress, we have the account of only one side, not of the other—we do not know that Scott did not in fact reiterate this upfront.

Anonymous wants us to contemn Scott and to put our faith and trust in the "pious" assertions of a sect that systematically behaves like a Pederastic Mafia!