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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 30

Author Topic: Bishop Pfeiffer  (Read 30926 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Venantius0518

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 277
  • Reputation: +62/-27
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
« Reply #240 on: August 04, 2020, 09:23:11 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Croixalist on August 04, 2020, 09:19:08 PM
    I'll be nice for once. In recognition of his great efforts in this regard, if there were a bishopric of Craigslist I think he should have it.
    There is one!

    Just kidding...  but this guy takes the cake.
    Logged

    Offline Croixalist

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1481
    • Reputation: +1056/-277
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #241 on: August 04, 2020, 09:27:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I forgot about him. How precious!
    Logged
    Fortuna finem habet.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #242 on: August 04, 2020, 09:33:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 04, 2020, 09:13:54 PM
    Reclosed, by this account:

    "In 1570 Pope Pius V excommunicated Queen Elizabeth I of England in the papal bull Regnans in Excelsis. This led to the Second Desmond Rebellion in 1579-83, which was still in progress when O'Hurley was required to travel to Ireland. On 11 September 1581, while still a layman, he was appointed Archbishop of Cashel by Pope Gregory XIII. He was ordained and consecrated and set out on his mission in 1583.[3]"
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dermot_O%27Hurley

    The Menzingen shill strikes out again!

    [NB: The same article, in the far right-hand column, notes he was ordained on September 9, and consecrated on September 10, 1581.  That contradicts the information provided in the same article above, that he was still a layman on September 11, but both the above quote, and the right-hand column declare he was ordained a priest before he was consecrated a bishop. -SJ]

    Still another account that he was not consecrated a bishop until having first received all the other minor and major orders:

    http://www.limerickcity.ie/media/saints016.pdf
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #243 on: August 04, 2020, 10:05:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SaintJude on August 04, 2020, 09:55:19 PM
    Ah, Wikipedia with no reference. Who’d have thought it. Well, if you’re using these two as an authority I’m using this:
    https://www.academia.edu/33566151/diaconate_and_women_newton_academia_pdf

    But it’s all academic really. Bishop Pfeiffer is a bishop - there’s absolutely no doubt about that - and he’ll prove to be the greatest of all the Resistance bishops.


    Get ready for a new Society with its own bishops, priests, brothers, sisters, third order etc.

    Except only the first one was Wiki, not the second.

    But if your Menzingn bosses require more haggling, here is yet a 3rd reference showing him to be a priest before being consecrated:

    https://www.exclassics.com/foxe/dermot.htm (See 1st paragraph).

    Seriously, this is too easy.

    Fr. Pagliarani: You can find better help!

    [PS to those who do not understand why a Menzingen shill would be arguing in favor of the validity of Pfeiffer's consecration: It reflects poorly upon the Resistance, as many do not distinguish between the Pfeifferian and real Resistance.  He WANTS Pfeiffer to be accepted as a real bishop, to the detriment of all Resistance generally, by careless association.]
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #244 on: August 04, 2020, 10:19:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SaintJude on August 04, 2020, 10:15:32 PM
    Oh dear, doesn’t say what you want it to “Holy Orders” - that’s just the name of the sacrament, doesn’t mean he received more than one.
    You thought that you could keep him down by refusing to ordain his seminarians?Well, it’s over now for the other Resistance bishops as the faithful will now leave to join Bishop Pfeiffer.

    Nope: It says he was consecrated a bishop after having taken Holy Orders.

    But I do thank you (for the duller on the forum) for validating my outing of you yet again.  

    It hardly gets a rise any more, and you seem to decline on an annual basis.  

    Its as though you were some British computer guy working in California who had no friends, and strangely, I am as close as you get.

    Hmm...
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #245 on: August 04, 2020, 10:26:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SaintJude on August 04, 2020, 10:23:40 PM
    This is all completely false. 
    Already debunked by Ladislaus, and everyone else who heard the botched form.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-484
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #246 on: August 04, 2020, 11:09:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 04, 2020, 10:05:15 PM
    [PS to those who do not understand why a Menzingen shill would be arguing in favor of the validity of Pfeiffer's consecration: It reflects poorly upon the Resistance, as many do not distinguish between the Pfeifferian and real Resistance.  He WANTS Pfeiffer to be accepted as a real bishop, to the detriment of all Resistance generally, by careless association.]
    OK, I suppose that's possible, but I think it's unlikely.
    Is it not more likely Jude is a Pfeiffer follower, or Pfeiffer himself?
    Logged

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31202
    • Reputation: +27121/-495
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #247 on: August 04, 2020, 11:14:40 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stanley N on August 04, 2020, 11:09:52 PM
    OK, I suppose that's possible, but I think it's unlikely.
    Is it not more likely Jude is a Pfeiffer follower, or Pfeiffer himself?
    Either of you could be right.
    Frankly, it's impossible to know for sure.

    But in either case, such a propaganda machine is most unwelcome on CI. He had his shot, he made his case.
    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 SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #248 on: August 04, 2020, 11:33:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stanley N on August 04, 2020, 11:09:52 PM
    OK, I suppose that's possible, but I think it's unlikely.
    Is it not more likely Jude is a Pfeiffer follower, or Pfeiffer himself?
    No.  But that's definitely what he wanted you to think.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Croixalist

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1481
    • Reputation: +1056/-277
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #249 on: August 05, 2020, 05:01:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stanley N on August 04, 2020, 11:09:52 PM
    OK, I suppose that's possible, but I think it's unlikely.
    Is it not more likely Jude is a Pfeiffer follower, or Pfeiffer himself?

    It's probably Pablo. No one could shill like that for Pfeiffer without demonic inspiration.
    Logged
    Fortuna finem habet.

    Offline Venantius0518

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 277
    • Reputation: +62/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #250 on: August 05, 2020, 07:22:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Croixalist on August 05, 2020, 05:01:03 AM
    It's probably Pablo. No one could shill like that for Pfeiffer without demonic inspiration.
    Aren't they all a bit like pablo now?
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41910
    • Reputation: +23947/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #251 on: August 05, 2020, 12:00:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Croixalist on August 05, 2020, 05:01:03 AM
    It's probably Pablo. No one could shill like that for Pfeiffer without demonic inspiration.

    Comes across as a bit too articulate to be Pablo, but definitely a +?Pfeiffer follower.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #252 on: August 05, 2020, 12:12:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • It was the same old Menzingen shill trying to discredit the Resistance by arguing in favor of a valid +Pfeiffer.

    Textual criticism leaves no doubt about this.

    Also, the shill was defending the validity of the consecration primarily by implicitly conceding the invalidity of Webster’s priestly ordination (ie., arguing a layman can be validly consecrated).

    That is not a position Boston would concede or accept.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41910
    • Reputation: +23947/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #253 on: August 05, 2020, 12:37:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 05, 2020, 12:12:53 PM
    It was the same old Menzingen shill trying to discredit the Resistance by arguing in favor of a valid +Pfeiffer.

    Textual criticism leaves no doubt about this.

    Also, the shill was defending the validity of the consecration primarily by implicitly conceding the invalidity of Webster’s priestly ordination (ie., arguing a layman can be validly consecrated).

    That is not a position Boston would concede or accept.

    Sounds plausible.
    Logged

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4452
    • Reputation: +5061/-436
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #254 on: August 05, 2020, 12:50:41 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 05, 2020, 12:12:53 PM
    It was the same old Menzingen shill trying to discredit the Resistance by arguing in favor of a valid +Pfeiffer.

    Textual criticism leaves no doubt about this.

    Also, the shill was defending the validity of the consecration primarily by implicitly conceding the invalidity of Webster’s priestly ordination (ie., arguing a layman can be validly consecrated).

    That is not a position Boston would concede or accept.
    .
    I'm not so sure. 
    .
    Why would Menzingen waste their time fanning a self-fueling fire?  I mean, Boston conceded to and accepted Ambrose Moran.
    Logged
    "Be kind; do not seek the malicious satisfaction of having discovered an additional enemy to the Church... And, above all, be scrupulously truthful. To all, friends and foes alike, give that serious attention which does not misrepresent any opinion, does not distort any statement, does not mutilate any quotation. We need not fear to serve the cause of Christ less efficiently by putting on His spirit". (Vermeersch, 1913).
    Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 30
    « previous next »