Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

Author Topic: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020  (Read 2092 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tradman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1247
  • Reputation: +786/-271
  • Gender: Male
Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
« Reply #45 on: August 03, 2020, 12:05:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on August 03, 2020, 11:56:19 AM
    Tradman, in this particular case, where there is indisputable evidence which proves he received a doubtful/invalid consecration, word of mouth that this was corrected is not good enough to serve as proof, not by any stretch. As it is now, now he *has to* provide evidence of validity.  
    I definitely won't argue. It would be prudent to post the video. 
    Logged

    Offline Venantius0518

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 277
    • Reputation: +62/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #46 on: August 03, 2020, 12:13:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Tradman on August 03, 2020, 11:05:15 AM
    I've since talked to other seminarians in order to get clarity. All were in agreement, although each had his own description. Basically, the MC caught the error and warned the bishop(s). Pfeiffer dismissed the warning and said everything was ok.  Discussion ensued. They reviewed the recording and reconsecrated.  Pfeiffer says a reconsecration was done when he spoke the following day at the sermon at the diaconate.  I agree it would be nice to see a statement from Bishop Webster but I'm no longer in doubt about whether or not Pfeiffer is a bishop.    
    Methinks the right had does not know what the left is doing.  
    Logged

    Offline Venantius0518

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 277
    • Reputation: +62/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #47 on: August 03, 2020, 12:15:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on August 03, 2020, 11:20:11 AM
    It begs the question: Why would they publish a video that contains obvious errors without a rider explaining the correction?
    A rider is not enough.
    They put out the video proving invalidity of the co secretion.  They need to put  out the video of the conditional consecration.
    .
    Then there is still the discussion of the validity of Webster's ordination.
    .
    And of tonsure, subdiaconate and diaconates....  major orders are in question.
    Logged

    Offline Venantius0518

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 277
    • Reputation: +62/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #48 on: August 03, 2020, 12:17:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Tradman on August 03, 2020, 12:05:03 PM
    I definitely won't argue. It would be prudent to post the video.
    Prudent?
    Necessary.
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #49 on: August 03, 2020, 12:19:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Venantius0518 on August 03, 2020, 12:15:17 PM
    A rider is not enough.

    Right.  I think his point, though, was that if they did in fact noticed it immediately, as they now claim, why not give an explanation before publishing the video?  ANSWER:  because they clearly did NOT notice the problem right away like they claim.
    Logged

    Offline Venantius0518

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 277
    • Reputation: +62/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #50 on: August 03, 2020, 12:28:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 03, 2020, 12:19:18 PM
    Right.  I think his point, though, was that if they did in fact noticed it immediately, as they now claim, why not give an explanation before publishing the video?  ANSWER:  because they clearly did NOT notice the problem right away like they claim.
    They may have noticed before they put out the video.  Remember 10 year old girl productions.... Perhaps she didn't get the memo not to post it.  Then it was quickly taken down.
    .
    Moot point, though.
    .
    The consecration was invalid.  Fr. Pfeiffer admitted such.  To prove the conditional consecration is valid, a video is needed.  
    Logged

    Offline RevolveBooks

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 89
    • Reputation: +70/-16
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #51 on: August 03, 2020, 01:29:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • It would seem that the not all of the Pfeiffer clan is supporting the "episcopacy" because 9 of them assisted at the SSPX mass yesterday instead of OLMC.
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #52 on: August 03, 2020, 01:30:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Venantius0518 on August 03, 2020, 12:28:45 PM
    They may have noticed before they put out the video.  Remember 10 year old girl productions.... Perhaps she didn't get the memo not to post it.  Then it was quickly taken down.
    .
    Moot point, though.
    .
    The consecration was invalid.  Fr. Pfeiffer admitted such.  To prove the conditional consecration is valid, a video is needed.  

    Yes, I'm sure Pablo published it as soon as he possibly could.  But evidently they were viewing the video immediately after the ceremony (so they say), so presumably that would have delayed Pablo.
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #53 on: August 03, 2020, 01:31:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: RevolveBooks on August 03, 2020, 01:29:52 PM
    It would seem that the not all of the Pfeiffer clan is supporting the "episcopacy" because 9 of them assisted at the SSPX mass yesterday instead of OLMC.

    hmmmmmm

    Of course, +?Pfeiffer's Mass would still be valid regardless.

    Either that or +?Pfeiffer was already out travelling, spreading the episcopal joy.
    Logged

    Offline RevolveBooks

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 89
    • Reputation: +70/-16
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #54 on: August 03, 2020, 01:38:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 03, 2020, 01:31:23 PM
    hmmmmmm

    Of course, ?+Pfeiffer's Mass would still be valid regardless.
    True but you have to take the culture of the family into account.  Blood is thicker than faith so this is hugely significant.
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #55 on: August 03, 2020, 01:40:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: RevolveBooks on August 03, 2020, 01:38:56 PM
    True but you have to take the culture of the family into account.  Blood is thicker than faith so this is hugely significant.

    Was he even there, or might he have been travelling the country randomly confirming and ordaining people?

    Alternatively, he was in Tennesee begging +Webster to re-consecrate him.   :laugh1:
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #56 on: August 03, 2020, 01:41:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I still anxiously await the ordination if not consecration of Pablo.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #57 on: August 03, 2020, 02:05:31 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    •  ::)
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline PAT317

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 900
    • Reputation: +776/-114
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #58 on: August 03, 2020, 02:08:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • What seminary did Neal Webster attend?  Did he have any training in Latin?  
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Live: Tonsure Minor Orders Subdeacons Deacon July 31, 2020
    « Reply #59 on: August 03, 2020, 02:12:43 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SaintJude on August 03, 2020, 02:03:36 PM
    The word “summam” certainly wasn’t pronounced as “sanum”; there’s no ‘an’ sound whatever (I don’t even hear that in the unamplified YouTube audio). If you listen attentively the ‘u’ is actually pronounced like the ‘ow’ in ‘town’, which is constant with his pronunciation of ‘spiritus’.

    Nonsense.  Bishop Sanborn, Father Chazal, and I all concluded that he said mysterii sanum.  We're all aware of pronunciation differences and this was not covered under that umbrella.  Bishop Sanborn and Father Chazal both speak a number of modern languages and have heard a broad range of Latin pronunciations.  I myself studied Latin formally starting with:  4 years High School, 4 Years College (B.A. in both Latin and Greek) and 3 years of Graduate School at Catholic University of America.  I taught undergraduate Latin at Catholic University and also taught Latin at St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary while I was there.  This was not a pronunciation issue by any stretch.  He was obviously confused and didn't recognize the word "summam", just like he didn't recognize that "in sacerdote tuo (in sacerdotibus tuis)" were listed as options to be chosen from depending upon whether there was one consecrand or more than one, just like he didn't understand that "comple" began a new sentence and a new thought.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
    « previous next »