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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 30

Author Topic: Bishop Pfeiffer  (Read 30859 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 41899
  • Reputation: +23942/-4344
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
« Reply #135 on: July 31, 2020, 01:17:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on July 31, 2020, 01:15:17 PM
    Actually, this one is just a picture, accompanied by the usual out of tune Mexican music.  But Matthew has it downloaded somewhere a couple pages ago.

    Sorry for the confusion.  This video and the "Enjoy!" comment was separate from the video still being there.  In the NovusOrdoWatch tweet he links to the youtube on Pablo's channel to the full consecration.  But I added this gem here for everyone's enjoyment.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #136 on: July 31, 2020, 01:18:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Miseremini on July 31, 2020, 01:16:47 PM
    If your first sentence is accurate why would either of them submit to the other?  They wouldn't.
    Sorry I just don't see any logic.

    It wouldn't be an act of submission.  It would be a way to make peace so that everyone could in good conscience go to either or both groups.
    Logged

    Offline Miseremini

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3756
    • Reputation: +2798/-238
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #137 on: July 31, 2020, 01:20:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Any predictions on when the first ordinations from Pfeifferville will take place?

    I predict August 15th, 2020
    Logged
    "Let God arise, and let His enemies be scattered: and them that hate Him flee from before His Holy Face"  Psalm 67:2[/b]

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #138 on: July 31, 2020, 01:20:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Matthew on July 30, 2020, 05:45:16 PM
    Guess what?

    I already archived the video. Here it is (625 MB) and anyone can download it -- not just those who are logged in:




    It looks like the software auto-inflates the link into a playable video. That's neat.
    For those who want to DOWNLOAD it, just right click and select "Save Video as..."

    Critical, for the record.

    I just listened to it, and definitely heard "mysterii" and "sanam" instead of the proper words of the essential form (and I'm pretty sure I heard the former repeated twice).

    Good job, Lad!
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #139 on: July 31, 2020, 01:25:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on July 31, 2020, 01:20:51 PM
    Critical, for the record.

    I just listened to it, and definitely heard "mysterii" and "sanam" instead of the proper words of the essential form (and I'm pretty sure I heard the former repeated twice).

    Good job, Lad!

    I just watched it because I have never actually seen a full video of a consecration.  I've seen snippets.  So I was curious about things like when the laying on of the hands took place in relation to the actual form being spoken.  Then when i heard it, I was taken aback and had to rewind it multiple times.  I was actually hoping to hear some kind of statement or sermon from Bishop Webster about why he consecrated Fr. Pfeiffer, given the latter's views on Feeneyism and sedevacantism.  But that didn't happen.  Instead I found myself doubting the validity of the consecration.
    Logged

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2246
    • Reputation: +1484/-605
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #140 on: July 31, 2020, 01:45:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I hope Bishop Zendejas and Bishop Williamson will make a statement.  I would hope they specifically address the validity issue especially the essential form of the consecration.  Fr Hewko's statement only addressed the validity of the Thuc line and since there is a tremendous amount of docuмentation refuting that position, I don't think it carries much weight.  But if the consecration was so badly done that the essential form was unintelligible, and several well-trained traditional Catholic clergy agreed, I think that would be dagger through the heart for "Bishop" Pfeiffer.  Maybe the Terrason connection is already enough to produce doubt?  I listened to the essential form of the consecration and I agree it was badly muffed.  It was bad enough that now I'm questioning Webster's competence.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #141 on: July 31, 2020, 01:49:17 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on July 31, 2020, 01:20:51 PM
    Critical, for the record.

    I just listened to it, and definitely heard "mysterii" and "sanam" instead of the proper words of the essential form (and I'm pretty sure I heard the former repeated twice).

    Good job, Lad!

    Here is a comparison to the 1988 SSPX consecrations.

    Begin at 11:47, with the cameras only catching the 2nd half of the essential form, beginning at 12:34 ("et ornamentis totius..."):



    PS: Prior to the 1988 episcopal consecrations, Archbishop Lefebvre had already served as the principal consecrator three times (and as coconsecrator an unknown number of times).  He knew what he was doing, and having received doctorates in Rome at a time when he would have been tested in Latin, he understood what he was saying and doing.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline In Principio

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 48
    • Reputation: +32/-3
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #142 on: July 31, 2020, 02:05:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Would Bp. Webster's mangling of the essential words in this instance be sufficient for positive doubt about other ordinations he's performed?
    Logged
     "The faithful should obey the apostolic advice not to know more than is necessary, but to know in moderation." - Pope Clement XIII, In Dominico Agro (1761) 

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #143 on: July 31, 2020, 02:22:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: In Principio on July 31, 2020, 02:05:54 PM
    Would Bp. Webster's mangling of the essential words in this instance be sufficient for positive doubt about other ordinations he's performed?

    Well, let's just say this:

    My understanding is that when the SSPX receives a refugee from the conciliar church, it conducts an investigation into the priest's ordination (which in turn evolves into an investigation of the consecrating bishop).  

    In the absence of a recording of the ordination, where such a bishop is known to habitually violate the form of the sacrament (among other reasons), the SSPX would probably (at least formerly) conditionally ordain.

    That modus operandi seems to imply that they believe an invalid sacrament in one instance could imply invalidity for the same reasons in other instances.

    So my answer to your question is a big fat "maybe" (i.e., I am not sure), but I am inclined to say yes, with a big asterisk*

    * Because perhaps his mangling was the result of a new eye problem, whereas before he was very careful and precise?
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31196
    • Reputation: +27113/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #144 on: July 31, 2020, 02:23:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • To expand on what I said earlier, that this botched consecration might be providential --

    I knew a man IRL, a Traditional Catholic, who taught me by his example a LOT about lying, manipulation, and many other things.

    The thing about liars is that they throw up so much "chaff" (distractions, like the chaff released by fighter jets to attract and confuse the missiles launched against them) that they end up believing their own lies -- they end up confusing themselves. It's as if God punishes them by taking away their ability to discern and grasp the truth, even when it stares them in the face. What a fitting punishment -- how infinitely just is God!

    Also, liars are so NOT detail oriented and sloppy, that they end up lying about things that careful people with clear consciences see right through.

    It's much like pride is punished by letting the person get puffed up with that pride they love so much -- and soundly humiliated (think: Hillary Clinton in 2016).
    Sodomites are punished in those members in which they have sinned: trips to the emergency room, HIV, damage to their bodies, poor health.

    Another related point: criminals (and sinners) ALWAYS project their own thoughts and failings onto others. A thief thinks everyone is a thief. A liar thinks others are lying. Their crowning achievement is to accuse others of the very specific crimes they are guilty of (Hillary Clinton accusing Trump of colluding with Russia).

    It is fitting somehow, that Fr. Pfeiffer, who obviously cared little about proper rubrics, probably didn't even notice. He was befuddled, so he assumed we all would be befuddled as well. Moroever, there's the pride aspect: "I'm smarter than all of them, and >I< don't see a problem. Go ahead and post it." He allowed this video to be posted!

    Think of all the times Fr. Pfeiffer had no regard for the truth, as he assaulted Bp. Zendejas, Bp. Williamson. Think of all the times he promoted Ambrose Moran the Fraudulent, or the pederast Tetherow. Or all the times he called his warlock controller Pablo "good". He has called black "white" and white "black" so many times, he has lost all bearing on what is true.
    Logged
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #145 on: July 31, 2020, 02:31:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on July 31, 2020, 01:49:17 PM
    Here is a comparison to the 1988 SSPX consecrations.
    ...
    PS: Prior to the 1988 episcopal consecrations, Archbishop Lefebvre had already served as the principal consecrator three times (and as coconsecrator an unknown number of times).  He knew what he was doing, and having received doctorates in Rome at a time when he would have been tested in Latin, he understood what he was saying and doing.

    Thank you.  Yes, it is clear that the Archbishop was very fluent with the Latin here.  This is another reason why under-trained priests and bishops can cause problems.  Clemente Dominguez was totally untrained.  We have no idea if he ever knew more than a word or two of Latin.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #146 on: July 31, 2020, 02:33:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Someone sent me a link to the docuмents of Bishop Terrasson being ordained the same day he was consecrated.  There appears to be no indication that the ordination to the priesthood was conditional, but I haven't studied these in depth either.

    https://www.reddit.com/gallery/hvza0d
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41899
    • Reputation: +23942/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #147 on: July 31, 2020, 02:34:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on July 31, 2020, 02:22:27 PM
    Well, let's just say this:

    My understanding is that when the SSPX receives a refugee from the conciliar church, it conducts an investigation into the priest's ordination (which in turn evolves into an investigation of the consecrating bishop).  

    In the absence of a recording of the ordination, where such a bishop is known to habitually violate the form of the sacrament (among other reasons), the SSPX would probably (at least formerly) conditionally ordain.

    That modus operandi seems to imply that they believe an invalid sacrament in one instance could imply invalidity for the same reasons in other instances.

    So my answer to your question is a big fat "maybe" (i.e., I am not sure), but I am inclined to say yes, with a big asterisk*

    * Because perhaps his mangling was the result of a new eye problem, whereas before he was very careful and precise?

    Right.  I think it very possible that Bishop Webster stumbled due to his frailty (vs. when he was younger).
    Logged

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2246
    • Reputation: +1484/-605
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #148 on: July 31, 2020, 03:20:32 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • I have to give credit to Fr Pfeiffer and Pablo for one thing.  They recorded the consecration ceremony and then made it public.  It's too bad all traditional clergy hadn't done the same thing.  Even back in the 70s and 80s audio tape recorders were cheap and readily available.  And by the early 90s video cameras were very affordable.
    Logged

    Offline Croixalist

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1481
    • Reputation: +1056/-277
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #149 on: July 31, 2020, 03:25:05 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
    • But will Pfeiffer be content to stay a "bishop" or will we be hearing about a Kentucky Conclave with chicken sacrifices?
    Logged
    Fortuna finem habet.
    Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 30
    « previous next »