[Matthew]

Near the end, Fr. Pfeiffer mentions some of "his faithful" from Philadelphia going to Mass with a Fr. Tetherow, who he describes as a "friend priest".

Another independent priest no one has heard of before has come out of the woodwork? Oh boy.

Anyhow, does anyone know who this priest is?


Fr. mentions it around 44:14:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/awX8pdPxmSQ[/youtube]

[Incredulous]

Father Pfeiffer doesn't look good.

[Caraffa]

Fr. Tetherow is a convicted pedophile.

http://www.saintspeterandpaulrcm.com/OPEN%20LETTERS/TETHEROW.htm

How ironic that the title of Fr. Pfeiffer's sermon is "Ecclesiastical Wickedness."

[Incredulous]

Matthew and Caraffa,

Thank you for the astute observations.

This is another example of why the trad forums are important.

[Maria Auxiliadora]

When my husband, D.M. Drew, believed Tetherow's lies, he offered twice to pay a lawyer to clear his name. He turned him down to which my husband replied: "Father, you would not be here if you were not defensible". We later found out that the whole time my husband was defending his name, he was calumniating us to the faithful to gain their support. He knew it was only a matter of time before my husband would discover all his lies.

People tells us: "He is very convincing". Yes, his whole existence depends on his lies and false accusations of any one who is on to him. By the time you realize what he is, your name is mud.

[Maria Auxiliadora]

Have Frs P and H been made aware of the open letter above? Does anyone know for certain?

If Fr. Hewko would like to speak to DMD, or myself, PM and I'll give you our cell phone #s. We have more to say. I have met Fr. Hewko and he may remember me. DMD is taking hospital call until Wed. morning.

[TKGS]

The linked article seems to indicate that this man was ordained by a New Rite bishop since he was part of a group established--at later suppressed--by a Conciliar bishop, thus his orders are, at best, doubtful.  Why would any traditional Catholic priest have anything to do with him whether or not he knew anything about his other problems?

[Matthew]

All good questions.

So to summarize:

1. Fr. Tetherow is a newpriest ordained in the new Rite of ordination, which is at least doubtful. He has not been conditionally ordained.
2. Following on #1, no Resistance or traditional priest should be referring their Faithful to a priest whose orders are doubtful. Isn't this why we attack the neo-SSPX: for ceasing to conditionally ordain priests, embracing Vatican II as much as possible, suppressing the truth, etc.?
3. According to Maria Auxiliadora, a local, there is only one Fr. Tetherow in the area, so there's not a mix-up or mistaken identity (oh, how much better it would be if there were!)
4. It sounds like this Fr. Tetherow has problems with slander and lying -- he's a different kind of liar than Ambrose Moran was. Why does Fr. Pfeiffer attract so many liars and bad men to himself? Birds of a feather flock together? Water seeks its own level?
5. It would appear that there are not just a few skeletons in Fr. Tetherow's closet, but he actually is A) laicized by the Novus Ordo and B) convicted of pedophilia and C) found to have downloaded child porn.
6. Note that Fr. Pfeiffer seems quite content that at least "some" of "his faithful" are attending Mass with this doubtfully ordained, convicted pedophile "friend priest" of his, rather than his competition Fr. Zendejas and Fr. Garcia who have no such stains and who are priests with 100% certain ordination and training.
7. But, like with Ambrose Moran, it doesn't matter HOW INSANE it is on the surface to support certain priests or "priests" -- what matters is that they stay on Fr. Pfeiffer's good side. If you're Fr. Pfeiffer's friend, it doesn't matter how seriously messed up you are (Pablo? Ambrose Moran? Fr. Tetherow?). Fr. Pfeiffer will defend you to the death. On the other hand, if you have somehow gotten on Fr. Pfeiffer's bad side, it doesn't matter how saintly you are (Fr. Zendejas? Fr. Voigt? +Williamson? +Faure?). You're in for a constant and unrelenting attack, even to the point of lying, slander, and maliciously distorting the truth.

Apparently in Fr. Pfeiffer's reality, the state of grace is intrinsically bound up with love of Fr. Pfeiffer instead of love of God! No one gets into heaven without the love of Pfeiffer in their soul?

I leave you with a Scripture quote:

[3] And why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother' s eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye? [4] Or how sayest thou to thy brother: Let me cast the mote out of thy eye; and behold a beam is in thy own eye? [5] Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam in thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

[wallflower]

Well that just squashed the tiny glint of hope I'd been desperately fostering. He is nowhere near recognizing his errors. He is as obstinate as ever.

I started around minute 40 and heard Fr DeMerode's name so I went back even more to get context. What is this meeting Fr DeMerode was not allowed to attend? Does anyone know more about this and the veracity of Fr Pfeiffer's version?

In the same breath that Fr Tetherow is a friend priest, Fr Zendejas is still red-lighted. BUT Frs P and H are soooo open and generous that they will still accept anyone at their Masses, even if they had been to Fr Z's Mass. As if that's what is meant when it's said that they are  "exclusive".   Who uses the word exclusive anyway? The appropriate word most are using is cultish. And yes, cults will always accept you IN. It's getting OUT that is the problem.

This is the twilight zone. Completely and utterly unbelievable. How? How is he drudging up these characters but refusing to work with his XSSPX confreres?!

He speaks as if his seminarians are being refused the sacraments but Holy Orders is not a right in the same sense that Baptism, Penance and Communion are. I'm sorry but if you are badly formed and a bishop won't ordain you, it is not an act of persecution. The visions of grandeur are really sickening. They make any chance of reform completely impossible. I struggle with being in complete denial that this is really how it's going to end for Frs P & H. It's heartbreaking.



 

[Matthew]

When the Conciliar Church thinks a priest needs to be laicized, that really says something about him!

http://www.dioceseofscranton.org/notice-regarding-dismissal-of-gabriel-tetherow/


Posted on: 03-4-2015 Posted in: News
This notice is to inform the Christian faithful that Virgil Bradley “Gabriel Francis” Tetherow, formerly a priest of the Diocese of Scranton, was dismissed from the clergy and returned to the lay state by the Holy Father, Pope Francis, on January 23, 2015. Mr. Tetherow was ordained a priest of the Diocese of Scranton June 29, 2002 and for one year after that was part of a private association known as the Servants Minor of Saint Francis, which was dissolved on November 17, 2003. In January 2005, Bishop Joseph F. Martino removed Mr. Tetherow from any public ministry when the Diocese of Scranton learned that he had been arrested for possession of child pornography, for which Mr. Tetherow was later sentenced to two years’ probation. Although resident in a rectory in Tobyhanna at the time, Mr. Tetherow never had a parish assignment in the Diocese of Scranton. Because he has been removed from the clerical state, Virgil Bradley “Gabriel Francis” Tetherow is forbidden to function as a priest in the Catholic Church and should no longer present himself as such.

[PAT317]

The linked article seems to indicate that this man was ordained by a New Rite bishop since he was part of a group established--at later suppressed--by a Conciliar bishop, thus his orders are, at best, doubtful.  Why would any traditional Catholic priest have anything to do with him whether or not he knew anything about his other problems?

A few years ago Fr. Pfeiffer said in a sermon that probably most Novus Ordo Masses are valid.  Which implies he doesn't have much if any doubt about validity of New Rite priests.  This is a difference I've noticed between him & Fr. Zendejas, because Fr. Z has made comments regarding the doubtfulness, and how/why the SSPX used to conditionally ordain.  

[Matthew]

The linked article seems to indicate that this man was ordained by a New Rite bishop since he was part of a group established--at later suppressed--by a Conciliar bishop, thus his orders are, at best, doubtful.  Why would any traditional Catholic priest have anything to do with him whether or not he knew anything about his other problems?

A few years ago Fr. Pfeiffer said in a sermon that probably most Novus Ordo Masses are valid.  Which implies he doesn't have much if any doubt about validity of New Rite priests.  This is a difference I've noticed between him & Fr. Zendejas, because Fr. Z has made comments regarding the doubtfulness, and how/why the SSPX used to conditionally ordain.  

Can you say hypocrisy?

Fr. Pfeiffer's only claim to attack +Williamson was the latter's balanced (non-Sedevacantist) view of the Novus Ordo Mass. (Nota Bene: +Williamson never said anything like "you can attend the Novus Ordo Mass." He was talking to one specific woman who basically begged permission in so many words.)

[Maria Auxiliadora]

Fr. Tetherow is a newpriest ordained in the new Rite of ordination, which is at least doubtful. He has not been conditionally ordained.

He was ordained at the same time as some Fraternity of St. Peter priests by + Fabian Bruskewitz to start his own Franciscan order "according to the primitive rule" (according to him).

[wallflower]

When the Conciliar Church thinks a priest needs to be laicized, that really says something about him!

Not to take away from your point because I agree that we shouldn't be dealing with him, but I do wonder if the laicizations today are a bit candy-coated like the annulments. Not that I have any better solution, I really don't know what ought to be done with pedophile priests. But did laicization happen before now? I can't help wondering if a holier and more faithful Papacy would come up with a better solution that kept people safe but didn't minimize/disregard the eternal character of the priesthood.

[Guardian Angel]

Fr. Pfeiffer's only claim to attack +Williamson was the latter's balanced (non-Sedevacantist) view of the Novus Ordo Mass. (Nota Bene: +Williamson never said anything like "you can attend the Novus Ordo Mass." He was talking to one specific woman who basically begged permission in so many words.)

And according to you, does her begging justify His Excellency allowing her?