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

Author Topic: Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer  (Read 2947 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline donkath

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1517
  • Reputation: +616/-116
  • Gender: Female
    • h
Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
« on: July 09, 2013, 12:19:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Reference for following quote:

    http://cathinfo-warning-pornography!/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=12700&hl=

    Quote
    Fr. Joe Pfeiffer delivers a thorough talk, dissecting, comparing and contrasting the Declaration of the SSPX 3 Bishops from 27 JUNE 13. This talk was given in Danbury, CT on 7 July 2013.

    Fr. Pfeiffer speaks for over an hour, and explains not just paragraph 11, but almost all the other paragraphs... clearly demonstrating his conclusions that once again, there a shift in the theology of the SSPX official.

    Here's the download MP3 link. Click and it should automatically download. I'm sure someone will make a YouTube version soon. If you want to go the webpage and download later, click the second link.



    http://www.mediafire.com/?q7b6h1u1xc5obqn/...C_Catechism.mp3

    http://www.CathInfo.com/f...joseph-pfeiffer
    "In His wisdom," says St. Gregory, "almighty God preferred rather to bring good out of evil than never allow evil to occur."


    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #1 on: July 09, 2013, 02:30:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: donkath
    Reference for following quote:

    http://cathinfo-warning-pornography!/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=12700&hl=

    Quote
    Fr. Joe Pfeiffer delivers a thorough talk, dissecting, comparing and contrasting the Declaration of the SSPX 3 Bishops from 27 JUNE 13. This talk was given in Danbury, CT on 7 July 2013.

    Fr. Pfeiffer speaks for over an hour, and explains not just paragraph 11, but almost all the other paragraphs... clearly demonstrating his conclusions that once again, there a shift in the theology of the SSPX official.

    Here's the download MP3 link. Click and it should automatically download. I'm sure someone will make a YouTube version soon. If you want to go the webpage and download later, click the second link.



    http://www.mediafire.com/?q7b6h1u1xc5obqn/...C_Catechism.mp3

    http://www.CathInfo.com/f...joseph-pfeiffer



    The mediafire link is as follows:

    http://www.mediafire.com/?q7b6h1u1xc5obqn/Fr._J._Pfeiffer%2C_July_7%2C_2013%2C_Danbury%2C_CT%2C_Catechism.mp3

    Your copy ignores the dropped characters so the link might not work
    properly unless you click on this one, above.

    Duration 1:09:41

    The second link is the the Verboten website so it's not going to post here.
    If someone wants to patch it together use this:

    http:/ /www.in*this-sign.you'shall~conquer.com/father-joseph-pfeiffer





    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline donkath

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1517
    • Reputation: +616/-116
    • Gender: Female
      • h
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #2 on: July 09, 2013, 02:54:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thanks Neil Obstat.

    It not only opened for me on the first link but the download commenced immediately.  I didn't try the second link...many thanks.

    Fr. Pfeiffer does a brilliant analysis of this latest Declaration.  
    "In His wisdom," says St. Gregory, "almighty God preferred rather to bring good out of evil than never allow evil to occur."

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #3 on: July 09, 2013, 11:00:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .You're welcome, donkath.

    The Silver Anniversary Re-Declaration (SARD)

    This is a very good analysis of the Silver Anniversary Re-
    Declaration (SARD) from the Menzingen-denizens.  It goes
    a long way to prepare the reader for what is in store in
    years to come when we all look back at this in context of
    history yet to be written.

    When you first read the original docuмent it might seem
    to you that everything is okay now and this is evidence that
    the Society is 'back to normal.'  So they would lead you to
    believe.

    When the congregations of SSPX chapels worldwide last
    Sunday, June 30th, read this SARD in lieu of the Sunday
    sermon, perhaps a majority of the Faithful had that
    impression, however, a few may have picked out a bit
    of a rattlesnake-in-the-grass with #11, and rightly so.  
    It was a Diamondback, and it was hungry.  But not to
    fear, for Fr. Pfeiffer now wears its skin as a headband on
    his Cowboy hat.   :cowboy:

    That is to say, when the chapels worldwide followed
    orders for reading aloud the SARD in lieu of sermons and
    without any explanation for WHY it's being read or what
    the overall aim of this docuмent really is, this was their
    one-and-only chance to do so.  And the Menzingen-
    denizens, being rightly terrified of the Resistance,

    knowing that they only had one shot at this clay pigeon,
    took careful aim and used their best form in the stance,
    attention, rise, posture, movement, pull and follow-
    through, so as not to miss the target.  They knew they
    would not get a second shot.  And thanks to Fr. Pfeiffer,
    they do not get a second shot.  The cat's out of the
    bag.  

    For anyone now having heard this conference of July 7th
    2013 from Danbury CT, will know how to read the SARD
    once and for all.  

    Fr. goes through the other #'s too, not only #11. Some
    of them are 'okay' like #12, so he skips those due to
    time constraints.  

    A woman near the end calmly asks about the intentions
    of the author of the SARD.  She says that not long after
    the Newmass breathed itself into existence as if it were
    some kind of god, she studied under a Communist who at
    the time was not known for being a Communist.  She had
    learned from him that it is a sign of maturity for a mind to
    be able to cope with internal contradictions to the effect
    that white is black and black is white.  Later in life, this
    would come out in B16's hermeneutic of continuity and
    HEBF*s penchant to make a 'deal' with modernist Rome.
    And now, she says, she sees it in this SARD, and there is
    no way that the author could have put it there innocently.

    Fr. Pfeiffer attempts to answer her concerns, trying to leave
    open the possibility that HEBF and his ostensible cronies
    may not have been the original authors but only put their
    contributions into this patchwork quilt of a SARD, as it
    were, so as to make it more sugar-coated and easier to
    swallow (My words here).  But then why would the initial
    authors remain unidentified?  Who knows?  Who could they
    have been?  We have not taken that road.

    But the woman does not abandon the question, and says
    that it takes training to be able to write a docuмent that
    conveys a message subliminally that is not overtly evident
    from the first reading of the text, and that her professor,
    using Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky as a textbook,
    showed her how it is done.  She proposes the theory that
    the Menzingen-denizens have an ulterior motive, to
    deliberately deceive the Faithful while APPEARING to be
    teaching the truths of the Faith by way of this SARD.

    Fr. Pfeiffer answers by saying there are two possible reasons
    for having such a text read in lieu of giving a sermon at Mass.
    One is a properly formed reason, which is to teach the
    Faithful the truth of God by way of a good SARD.  

    The other is not so Pollyanna, and consists of a desire to
    placate the Faithful so they won't be upset with you, so as
    to make them think they are getting the truth of God while
    what they are actually getting only APPEARS to be the truth
    but is in reality nothing other than a disguised weapon to
    destroy their faith, a MALFORMED SARD that appears to be
    a good SARD, but is in truth a subversive docuмent that
    can be used later to usher in Modernism, a bit like the Trojan
    Horse ushered in enemy soldiers who then opened the city
    gates at night to let in the rest of the attacking army
    (My words again).

    The woman tries to evoke the accusation that the Menzingen-
    denizens are entirely aware of the evil this docuмent does
    but Fr. Pfeiffer moves on to the next question, running out
    of time (running overtime, apparently).

    There is a lot of tension in this topic.  It seems to me this
    subject is far from over.  The points Fr. makes need to be
    looked at and discussed.  Fortunately, CI offers a venue
    where this discussion can take place.  



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Frances

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2660
    • Reputation: +2241/-22
    • Gender: Female
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #4 on: July 09, 2013, 06:12:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  :confused1:  M O R E   Q U E S T I O N S!
      Frances here!  I'm "the woman" referred to by Neil.  I'm not done with questions for Fr. Pfeiffer!  (He did have to leave to say another Mass in NJ.)  I haven't yet listened to the recording, so I'm not sure if Father's comment that it takes a special grace to see the "double speak" is on it.  The Communist "professor" was my 8th grade Social Studies teacher in public school in the 1973-1974 school year.  At that time, he had a Master's degree in political science from Columbia University and a Bachelor's degree from UCAL Berkeley, and was in the second year of his first "real" job after serving in the Peace Corps in Africa. With all due respect to Fr. Pfeiffer, I find it very hard to believe that I am so holy as to have been granted a special grace!  If someone did write the docuмent for the Bishops to sign, it means that I am smarter than them, or, that they know what they're doing, or, that they signed it under threat of dire consequences. (Death threat?)  I do not necessarily believe the Bishops have studied Saul Alinsky, but surely they are more intelligent than to have been innocently duped.  
    I'd like to know what others think about it.
     St. Francis Xavier threw a Crucifix into the sea, at once calming the waves.  Upon reaching the shore, the Crucifix was returned to him by a crab with a curious cross pattern on its shell.  


    Online Viva Cristo Rey

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16440
    • Reputation: +4863/-1803
    • Gender: Female
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #5 on: July 09, 2013, 10:56:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Isn't Saul alinsky associated with Obama.  
    May God bless you and keep you

    Offline Frances

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2660
    • Reputation: +2241/-22
    • Gender: Female
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #6 on: July 09, 2013, 11:29:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  :read-paper:
    Pres. Obama credits Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals with helping him win the 2008 election.  Both Obama and my teacher went to Columbia, but not together.  The teacher is now in his late 60s or early 70s.  Obama is quite a bit younger.
     St. Francis Xavier threw a Crucifix into the sea, at once calming the waves.  Upon reaching the shore, the Crucifix was returned to him by a crab with a curious cross pattern on its shell.  

    Offline resistanceman

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 20
    • Reputation: +39/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #7 on: July 10, 2013, 04:37:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Frances, I am sure that his eagerness is well aware of what is in that letter. All the "i",s are dotted and all the "t"'s are crossed on any official doc from Menzingen. They don't necessarily have to be Saul Alinsky students to do this, as the Corporate Branding lawyers will attend  to such matters,after all it is all part of the "Image".



    Offline Elsa Zardini

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 317
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #8 on: July 10, 2013, 06:23:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Frances, No wonder why I like all your posts . 100% in agreement.

    "I'd like to know what others think about it":

    Be some of the SSPX  GH  traitors since birth (or almost) (my belief, “infiltrators”)  or minds not properly working (to be polite) in others, either way they  will continue this sell out.  GH & co. are not going to resign. Should +W not have been excluded from the General Chapter, the story might have been different (might, because of the metastasis we now know of), but we can’t look at the past, useless, except to repent from sins.  And, even though HEagernessBF (to use Neil’s words!) resigns, it will not make any difference with all the available information coming to light almost every hour.

    What Neil is outlining here is so, so relevant:  “She `[you] had learned from him [your communist “professor”] that it is a sign of maturity for a mind to be able to cope with internal contradictions to the effect that white is black and black is white”… “She proposes the theory that the Menzingen-denizens have an ulterior motive, to deliberately deceive the Faithful while APPEARING to be teaching the truths of the Faith by way of this SARD”. “…as it were, so as to make it more sugar-coated and easier to swallow (My words here)”.

     The above has been so well explained in other Topic: “crimestop”, “crimethinks”, “thoughtcrime”...applied to good Priests.

    So, what's left? Save as many good Priests as possible ASAP first in France, by explaining personally the above as sweetly and smoothly as possible (we are dealing with minds, after all) and then elsewhere. And, we, laity, do whatever we can towards that end by supporting in any way we can +W and his closest friends. No room for other ones than twin souls in the emergency we are at. Not much time left. My cent.


    Offline Elsa Zardini

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 317
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #9 on: July 10, 2013, 09:25:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • since nobody asks me about "closest friends"   :cry::

    H.E. Bp. Richard Williamson SSPX
    Abbé Joseph Pfeiffer SSPX
    Dom Tomas de Aquino O.S.B.
    Père Jahir FBMV
    Abbé Jean-Michel Faure SSPX
    Abbé Ronald Ringrose
    Abbé Juan Carlos Ortiz SSPX
    Abbé Hugo Ruiz SSPX
    Abbé Ernesto Cardozo SSPX
    Père Joaquim FBMV
    Abbé Richard Voigt SSPX
    Abbé David Hewko SSPX
    Abbé François Chazal SSPX
    Abbé Valan Rajakumar SSPX
    Abbé Patrick Girouard SSPX
    Abbé René Trincado SSPX
    Abbé Olivier Rioult SSPX
    Dom Rafael OSB
    Abbé Edgardo Suelo SSPX
    Frère Placide OSB
    Frere André OSB


    And any other Priest who adds his signature to this Declaration...

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #10 on: July 10, 2013, 10:32:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Frances
    :confused1:  M O R E   Q U E S T I O N S!
      Frances here!  I'm "the woman" referred to by Neil.  I'm not done with questions for Fr. Pfeiffer!  (He did have to leave to say another Mass in NJ.)  I haven't yet listened to the recording, so I'm not sure if Father's comment that it takes a special grace to see the "double speak" is on it.  The Communist "professor" was my 8th grade Social Studies teacher in public school in the 1973-1974 school year.  At that time, he had a Master's degree in political science from Columbia University and a Bachelor's degree from UCAL Berkeley, and was in the second year of his first "real" job after serving in the Peace Corps in Africa. With all due respect to Fr. Pfeiffer, I find it very hard to believe that I am so holy as to have been granted a special grace!  If someone did write the docuмent for the Bishops to sign, it means that I am smarter than them, or, that they know what they're doing, or, that they signed it under threat of dire consequences. (Death threat?)  I do not necessarily believe the Bishops have studied Saul Alinsky, but surely they are more intelligent than to have been innocently duped.  
    I'd like to know what others think about it.




    Dear Frances,

    It's a pleasure to make your acquaintance.  I have the feeling that I
    must have met you many years ago from the sound of your voice in
    this recording of Fr. Pfeiffer's speech.  Please do continue to contribute
    your insights and perceptions to the Resistance.  What you have to
    say is very helpful.  And do not make the mistake of shortchanging the
    signal grace you receive from Fr. Pfeiffer when he implies that
    you have received a grace that HEBF* and the Menzingen-denizens
    seem to be missing.  

    He is not shooting from the hip, so to speak.  When he says such
    things, it is not because he is unprepared to say them.  

    When we are the recipient of grace, sometimes it is not obvious to us.
    Sometimes we are prone to believe that we are, for example, able to
    put A and B together and get C when others look at it and get D, E or
    F, or, lacking more fundamental prerequisites of logic and the ability to
    t-h-i-n-k, might be unable to add, and cannot put A and B together
    at all, for example, t.radical on IA, poor man.  But we then might go
    off thinking that it's no big deal, and that our putting A and B together
    to get C is such a simple thing that it can be entirely explained by
    natural causes and historical facts, and things like that, as Fr.
    Frederick Schell, bless his soul, used to say.

    But please know, Frances, that God put it in your history to have that
    professor, that closet Communist, in 8th grade!  And God put it in your
    mind at the time to be able to see him for what he was and not for
    what he would have you think he was, like probably every other
    student did in your class.  God gave you your mother who taught you
    on her knee how to pronounce Latin in the tradition of the Church,
    and how to think with the Apostolic tradition of Holy Mother Church.
    It is not a mere chance of statistical probability that you had what it
    took to be able to add the sound bytes and see the truth in Junior
    High School.  (Now they call it "Middle School" and it starts in 6th
    grade, and they "graduate" in 5th grade and they "graduate" from
    Kindergarten.)

    It is heartening to see that you have "more questions," nor is it at all
    surprising.  God has been going with you for many years, Frances, and
    God shall continue to do so.  You have been the recipient of a vast
    treasure that cannot be compared in temporal terms.  Please do not
    forget to thank God for His blessings you have already received, and
    remember not to take credit for these insights you have from the
    most pernicious and subversive of false doctrines that are handed out,
    like candy from the Pied Piper Menzingen-denizens, to the elect
    insomuch as to deceive them, even if possible (cf. Mat. xxiv. 24).

    God Bless!



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.


    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #11 on: July 10, 2013, 12:53:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .


    Here is a peek at a post in the IA forum linked in the OP by donkath
    (I have added the quote boxes using the CI codes).  Needless to
    say, IA would never approve my application for membership, so
    there is really no point in my trying.  Even if they would approve it,
    I'd be banned on the first or second post.  My comments inserted:



       
    Quote from: BennyBosco
    Posted: Jul 10 2013, 05:19 AM


    Hyperfocused Veteran


    Group: Members
    Posts: 128
    Member No.: 2289
    Joined: 29-November 12


       
    Quote from: t.radical
    QUOTE (tradical @ Jul 10 2013, 03:34 AM)
    Quote from: BennyBosco
    QUOTE (BennyBosco @ Jul 9 2013, 09:23 PM)
    Either the docuмents are wrong and full of heresy or they are not.  Why would they not just say so!
    [**See below**]

    Why not just say no?




    Here, it's anyone's guess whether t.radical is making a typo carelessly,
    whether he's making yet another blunder without knowing it, or if
    he's rather making a ridiculous attempt at what he thinks to be humor.

    In Los Angeles, under the longtime Freemason Darryl Gates as Chief of
    Police, he had a school program for children where LAPD officers would
    visit schools to make friends with the kids, called the D.A.R.E. program,
    and one of its mottos was "Just say 'no' to drugs."  I met a Freemason
    who showed me stamps from 30 years prior to that where the Masons
    had the motto, "Just Say No," enshrined in a design - but it had nothing
    to do with children, drug abuse, or policemen.  

    I'm not implying that t.radical is a Freemason.  I wouldn't do that!



    Quote
    Quote
    First the SSPX is not some spoiled modernist child that is upset because it isn't getting its way.




    True to form, t.radical hits the ground running with a fundamental error.

    The ExSPX is precisely this:  it has BECOME a spoiled child of Modernism
    that is upset because it isn't getting its way.  HEBF* and the Menzingen-
    denizens are TERRIFIED of the Resistance because it puts the spotlight
    on their lies, subversive agenda and nefarious schemes for all to see - that
    is, those with eyes to see, unlike t.radical, for instance.  For to him, it's
    the blind leading the blind and they both fall into the pit. (cf. Matt. xv. 14).

    "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear" (Mk. vii. 16).

    And, for those without ears to hear, because they refuse to listen to
    the sermons and lectures of Fr. Pfeiffer, perhaps the greatest preacher
    in the world today
    (cf. cantatedomino Posted on IA: Jul 9 2013, 05:27 PM),
    then, like I said, they'll just fall into the pit along with the Menzingen-
    denizens and their demigod, HEBF*.  



    Quote
    Quote
    Second, just refusing point blank accomplishes NOTHING. It is necessary to explain why you are rejecting something.




    Continuing in his steadfast error, t.radical presumes from the start that
    others are doing what in fact he himself does even while (like his elder
    brothers the Zionists typically do) he hurls accusations of same against
    them.  For t.radical 'refuses point blank' to even so much as listen to the
    conferences of Fr. Pfeiffer, although I'll grant him credit for admitting the
    truth of it.  

    Doing so, he accomplishes nothing, even though he refuses to see it
    as such, for to him, the goal is to further bury himself in his bottomless
    pit of UNKOWING, the same one in which the likes of Immanuel Kant was
    eternally lost, and deliberately so, by willful, pertinacious contempt of the
    truth.

    He thinks he's explaining why he rejects the sermons and speeches of Fr.
    Pfeiffer, even while he consistently exposes for all to see why he wants
    nothing to do with them -- he can't stand to hear cogent arguments
    against his demigods.  Plain and simple.



    Quote
    Quote
    Third, the position of the SSPX is not that the docs of V2 are 'full of heresy'.




    Again, t.radical doesn't bother to pay any attention to the words of
    the Founder of the SSPX, unless, of course, it's convenient.  He sifts
    through everything looking for snips that can be misinterpreted and
    then uses them for his false support of HEBF* and the Menzingen-
    denizens.  He attempts to equate the malformed new ExSPX with the
    Society of ABL, just as he fails to recognize Newchurch for the
    apostate gang of doctrinal criminals that it is, according to the actual
    words of ABL and not according to the newfangled misinterpretation
    and false re-packaging of him proffered by the ExSPX.



    Quote
    Quote
    As always the extreme position is comforting in its generalization but not the truth.




    In typical Liberal Doublespeak, t.radical describes himself and his cohorts,
    his "comrades" (a Soviet favorite term), being comforted by their extreme
    position of subverting the Society from within. Only in the most general
    terms is their generalization comforting to them while the demolish the
    bastions like the wreckovationists post Vat.II did in accord with the
    same unclean spirit of Vat.II, which is objectively working for the devil,
    and has no truck with the truth.



    Quote from: BennyBosco
    Quote from: t.radical
    The truth is that the SSPX has always classified the docuмents into three sets: Traditional, Ambiguous, and contradicting prior magisterium.




    Here, again, t.radical piles error on top of error, and pridefully so.

    The truth is, that the SSPX has always classified the docuмents of
    Vat.II into three sets: Traditional  (vaguely stated usually, or at least
    proximate to ambiguous terms that can mean different things to different
    people or at different times, and occasionally well stated "insomuch as to
    deceive (if possible) even the elect" (Matt. xxiv. 24);  Ambiguous (which
    constitutes the vast majority of everything in Vat.II's docuмents, as it
    was permeated with the unclean spirit that haunted even the ancients
    for it is the same unclean spirit cursed by the saints);  and contradicting
    the Magisterium.
    (This might well be t.radical's worst error, because,
    there has never been, in the HISTORY OF HOLY MOTHER CHURCH,
    any such thing as a "prior magisterium."  

    Of course, saying that to the likes of t.radical is like trying to convince
    a blank wall of a logical truth by way of presenting it by logical argument.  
    He won't even recognize what a logical argument is.  He'll accuse you of
    being "hateful" because you're "argumentative," and therefore
    "disobedient" to the "legitimate authority of the SG" even though HEBF*
    has no jurisdiction and no authority whatsoever over any of the Faithful
    unless they're 3rd Order members.  There is but ONE Magisterium in
    the Church,
    and the very fact that what poses today as "the
    magisterium" -- by way of the deception that was actually quite
    successful for a number of years and still persists to this day, that the
    'magisterium' is some collection of men who have offices in the Vatican
    or whatever -- has convinced the lemmings like t.radical to believe
    the LIE that there was a "previous magisterium" that is somehow
    out of date now, and has been replaced with the "current
    magisterium"
    is a MOST PERNICIOUS LIE that does INFINITE DAMAGE
    to the truth of God, in fact, it destroys all of religion, as Pope Saint Pius
    X so well explained in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, the landmark encyclical
    of 106 years ago, something that t.radical has never read, or, if he has
    (he would be lying to say he has) he did not understand it, or if he
    thinks he understood it, he has deliberately chosen to misunderstand it
    so as to then claim that 'everything's fine' and the ExSPX is 'back to
    normal'.




    Quote
    Quote
    God bless!


    The extreme position is comforting, I admit.

    Are you ready to go to your [particular judgment] and explain why Vatican II isn't all that bad and full of heresy?



    Sorry, Benny, I realize you mean well, but in truth, at our own
    particular judgment, we won't be standing there ready, willing and
    able to EXPLAIN SQUAT.  We will have nothing to answer for.  Our
    crimes, our unrepentant sins, our pride, our pertinacious refusal of
    God's graces -- they'll all be as so many chains locked to our arms
    and legs and waist, as so many meat hooks into our very flesh.  
    There will be no opportunity for escape or appeal to a 'higher court'.

    At our particular judgment the pernicious errors and heresies of
    Vat.II will be plain as day and there will be no mistake.  Our fallen
    penchant to take sides with the errors and heresies of Vat.II and
    the unclean spirit that goes along with it like baggage on a train
    will be inseparable, much to our misfortune.  

    The time is NOW to unload the BAD BAGGAGE of the unclean spirit
    of Vatican II, before it's too late, and Judgment Day is too late.


    Quote
    Catholics have always seen [the abiding principle, as being only] one error [is all it takes to make it] contaminating [of] the whole thing. 99% Catholic is NOT Catholic, it's Heresy!

    We accuse the council.

    Ave Maria,

    God bless you as well, thank you.





    **BELOW**
    Returning to the very start:
    Quote from: BennyBosco
    QUOTE (BennyBosco @ Jul 9 2013, 09:23 PM)
    Either the docuмents are wrong and full of heresy or they are not.  Why would they not just say so!



    This is an excellent question by BennyBosco, and it is key.  He was
    trying his best to ask it, but immediately fell prey to the diversionary
    tactics of the troll radical, t.radical.  

    Why indeed would they not just say so!?  In typical Liberal fashion, and
    under the rules for troll radicals by Saul Alinsky, they would not just say
    so because they had no intention of EVEN saying so.  They do not mean
    to say that the docuмents of Vat.II are wrong and full of heresy.  However,
    they know that in order to garner the would-be support of those who
    ought to be their opponents, the Traditional Catholics, these troll radicals
    in Menzingen, the Menzingen-denizens, birds of a feather with t.radical
    on IA (he might even be one of them!!! - think about that in your spare
    time!!), they need to APPEAR AS IF THEY ARE SAYING SO, even while
    they proceed to actually say quite the opposite, as Fr. Pfeiffer tries to
    explain in this talk.  He is making great strides toward this bad doctrine
    and is ever-so-close to pronouncing it, but he restrains himself because
    it would likely be misinterpreted as passing judgment on the intention
    of the Menzingen-denizens, which is the same thing the sedevacantists
    do toward the neo-Modernists like B16 and Francis.  

    If they wanted to say that the docuмents of Vat.II are wrong and full
    of heresy, they would say it.  But they do not say it and they choose to
    say something vaguely reminiscent of a thing that might be able to be
    construed as saying something like that, so as to deceive insomuch as
    it were possible, even the elect (cf. Matt. xxiv. 24).  

    This is the same reason (see above) that the docuмents of Vat.II have
    many traditional propositions in them, so that the council fathers could
    be swayed into thinking that 'everything's okay' and that the farm is
    safe from vandals and the treasury of the Church is not being robbed
    in plain sight.  

    They do not SAY SO and they in fact say SOMETHING ELSE because
    they are deceiving and conniving and malevolent destroyers of the
    Faith of Catholics.  And it is high time they are recognized for what
    they are in fact.  They are the enemy.  And the most merciful thing to
    do is to call them out and face them off and to make war with their
    bad ideas and their evil philosophy.  

    This is war.  And war is "not nice."  



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Offline Ecclesia Militans

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 984
    • Reputation: +14/-35
    • Gender: Male
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #12 on: July 11, 2013, 09:17:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • To ask for the right to teach the Faith and condemn the errors of Vatican II against the same Faith WITHOUT AT THE SAME TIME demanding Rome to do the same, it implicitly but necessarily follows that Rome also has the right to teach those errors it currently holds. The SSPX leaders are hence co-operating in objective grave sin, at least on the level of principle, because it reduces the Faith to opinions.

    Offline Neil Obstat

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18177
    • Reputation: +8276/-692
    • Gender: Male
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #13 on: July 11, 2013, 04:09:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ecclesia Militans
    To ask for the right to teach the Faith and condemn the errors of Vatican II against the same Faith WITHOUT AT THE SAME TIME demanding Rome to do the same, it implicitly but necessarily follows that Rome also has the right to teach those errors it currently holds. The SSPX leaders are hence co-operating in objective grave sin, at least on the level of principle, because it reduces the Faith to opinions.



    Well stated.  

    Ecuмaniacs do that.  "Well - that's just your opinion," forgetting
    that they're talking about a matter of the Faith.  This is why
    the importance of doctrine has been lost on modern man.  

    Like you may have heard about JPII, B16 and now Francis:
    "At least he's respectful of other religions."






    There is a new recording of Fr. David Hewko on this same topic,
    given in Post Falls on Sunday July 7th.  It's a sermon during his
    Resistance Mass there, and it's over an hour long.

    I hope those lucky people realize they're getting their money's
    worth!!  Even without having it be a parish -- yet --.  

    Link and OP here.



    .--. .-.-.- ... .-.-.- ..-. --- .-. - .... . -.- .. -. --. -.. --- -- --..-- - .... . .--. --- .-- . .-. .- -. -.. -....- -....- .--- ..- ... - -.- .. -.. -.. .. -. --. .-.-.

    Online Viva Cristo Rey

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16440
    • Reputation: +4863/-1803
    • Gender: Female
    Analysis of 27th July Declaration by Fr. Pfeiffer
    « Reply #14 on: July 12, 2013, 05:53:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes. They have uncrowned Him.    Vatican ll is centered on Man.  The true faith is centered on God.  

    Vatican  2  gave obedience a priority and ditched vows of poverty and chastity.

    May God bless you and keep you