Author Topic: Bishop Pfeiffer  (Read 9723 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23967
  • Reputation: +20952/-420
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
« Reply #180 on: July 31, 2020, 09:01:47 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • ...and Jean Laborie, Jean Pierre Danyel, Hugh George de Willmott-Newman, William Bernard Crow, Aleister Crowley, Theodor Reuss, et al. by way of Terrasson’s ordination.  

    Indeed!

    Bp. Zendejas, on the other hand, could have a big picture of +ABL on his website, pamphlets, etc. if he wanted to, because he DOES have a connection to +ABL -- in fact, his episcopal consecration comes directly from +ABL (through +Williamson).

    "Bp" Pfeiffer on the other hand, cannot claim this. He had to go FAR AFIELD outside the SSPX fold to find a bishop who could consecrate him.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6636
    • Reputation: +5091/-1859
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #181 on: July 31, 2020, 09:06:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pfeiffer certainly hasn’t wasted any time getting down to business!


    He ordained Sub-Deacons and Deacons?

    How many?
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 23967
    • Reputation: +20952/-420
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #182 on: July 31, 2020, 10:22:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ENOUGH!

    (Those I am talking to know who they are)
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Venantius0518

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 186
    • Reputation: +39/-23
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #183 on: July 31, 2020, 10:23:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pfeiffer certainly hasn’t wasted any time getting down to business!

    Pure insanity.

    Offline Minnesota

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 69
    • Reputation: +17/-10
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #184 on: July 31, 2020, 10:29:26 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • And the channel, 469fitter, is nothing but blind praise towards Bp? Pfeiffer and this whole farce. Even with people in the comments of the recent videos rightly decrying all this


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21535
    • Reputation: +11858/-6030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #185 on: August 01, 2020, 08:10:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ...and Jean Laborie, Jean Pierre Danyel, Hugh George de Willmott-Newman, William Bernard Crow, Aleister Crowley, Theodor Reuss, et al. by way of Terrasson’s ordination.  

    Ah, how could I forget?  There should be a prominent picture of His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII, Clemente Dominguez, from whom his orders partially derive (leading to the priestly ordination of Fr. Webster).


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21535
    • Reputation: +11858/-6030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #186 on: August 01, 2020, 08:11:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ah, how could I forget?  There should be a prominent picture of His Holiness Pope Gregory XVII, Clemente Dominguez, from whom these episcopal orders derive.

    And who knows?  Since +?Pfeiffer has red-lighted pretty much every single Traditional Catholic left in the world, he might become the spiritual successor of Gregory XVII.  Given his current theological/mental trajectory, I do not consider it far-fetched to speculate about a future Pope Shpudibush I.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21535
    • Reputation: +11858/-6030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #187 on: August 01, 2020, 08:23:44 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • OK, I've poked fun at +?Pfeiffer about the "Da michi shpudibush," but I'm sure it was largely a joke on his part.  I cannot speak to his grasp of Latin because he was a year or two ahead of me at Seminary and I never had any classes with him (and I didn't take Latin there at all).

    Joe (before he became a priest) was actually a very jovial, fun-loving guy ... and I really like him.  I'm not sure what happened over the years to make him bitter.  People say he changed a lot after the summer-camp drowning, and I surmise that Pablo has had a diabolical influence upon him.  We should really pray for him, and see is an exorcist if available to go after Pablo.  I really looked up to and respect his brother Tim, Father Timothy Pfeiffer, but the latter was much more serious, while Joe like to goof around a fair bit, so the "Shpudibush" was at least partly a joke.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21535
    • Reputation: +11858/-6030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #188 on: August 01, 2020, 08:28:02 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Based on what I've seen and Fr. Pfeiffer's past history, I would need to see a video of the conditional consecration before my doubt would be lifted regarding his validity.

    Fr. Pfeiffer has a history of dishonesty, as has been well documented here, and of spinning things in his favor.

    Also, even if Bishop Webster came out and confirmed the conditional consecration, based on how badly I saw him struggling with it during the initial video, I would not have a lot of confidence that he got it right he second time.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21535
    • Reputation: +11858/-6030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #189 on: August 01, 2020, 08:37:56 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • OK, so I just now had a chance to listen to his sermon.

    Did he REALLY refer to the "Holy Papacy of Francis"?

    Also, when he started talking about repeating the essential form afterward, he stuttered very badly, to the point of sounding like porky pig (in those old cartoons).  He was fairly fluent until he got that point and then started stuttering badly.  That suggests to me that he's not being totally honest.  I doubt very much that they noticed during the ceremony that it was a problem, since if they had, they would have had Bishop Webster repeat it right away.  He implies that this was corrected immediately after the ceremony.  I doubt it.  They probably just became aware of the problem after this thread and the Novus Ordo Watch post.

    Without a video, I don't buy it.

    Offline Croixalist

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1340
    • Reputation: +909/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #190 on: August 01, 2020, 09:38:59 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Now he is a "bishop" from the line of this "pope"?

    https://www.elmundo.es/cronica/2005/493/1111878014.html

    Quote
    Gregorio XVII reconoció que en su juventud fue presa del desenfreno sexual, y que acosó a hombres y mujeres adscritos a su secta. Pero eso no ha sido óbvice para que miles de personas permanezcan fieles a su credo. ¿Incluso después de su muerte?  

    "Gregory XVII recognized that in his youth he fell prey to sexual debauchery, and that he molested men and women attached to his sect. But that has not been an obstacle for thousands of people to remain faithful to their creed. Even after his death?"

    Quote
    El propio Clemente, conocido como La Voltio en círculos gays de la Sevilla del franquismo, confesó a sus acólitos hace pocos años sus pecados de incontinencia sexual, en aparente referencia a su acoso a monjas y obispos bajo su mando.  

    "Clemente himself, known as 'La Voltio' in gay circles in Franco's Seville (***he used to work at an electricity company), confessed to his acolytes a few years ago his sins of sexual incontinence, in apparent reference to his molestation of nuns and bishops under his command."

    Pfeiffer is marked for destruction many times over. He is the archetypal priest who forged his own calling, forged his own seminary, forged his own bishopric.

    I pray for his swift removal from the face of the earth. What a disgusting spectacle. Don't anyone dare put this all on the Mexican. If God's grace were enough for Pfeiffer, he'd never have resorted to Satan's power.
    Fortuna finem habet.


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6636
    • Reputation: +5091/-1859
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #191 on: August 01, 2020, 09:57:33 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • OK, so I just now had a chance to listen to his sermon.

    Did he REALLY refer to the "Holy Papacy of Francis"?

    Also, when he started talking about repeating the essential form afterward, he stuttered very badly, to the point of sounding like porky pig (in those old cartoons).  He was fairly fluent until he got that point and then started stuttering badly.  That suggests to me that he's not being totally honest.  I doubt very much that they noticed during the ceremony that it was a problem, since if they had, they would have had Bishop Webster repeat it right away.  He implies that this was corrected immediately after the ceremony.  I doubt it.  They probably just became aware of the problem after this thread and the Novus Ordo Watch post.

    Without a video, I don't buy it.

    If I were in his shoes, given all the issues surrounding the first doubtful/invalid attempt, I would certainly have recorded any subsequent conditional consecration, so that prospective seminarians, parents, faithful, and adversaries would have one less concern.

    If such a recorded video does not emerge demonstrating not only the fact of the conditional consecration, but also a valid rendition of the essential form, I think I am inclined to agree with Ladislaus that doubts will be justified (despite my own previous common sense observations that it would be crazy for the seminarians to accept orders in the very ceremony in which Fr./Bp. Pfeiffer acknowledges the defect of form).
    A fact trumps conjecture.

    Lad has been hitting the nail on the head this entire thread.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21535
    • Reputation: +11858/-6030
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #192 on: August 01, 2020, 10:04:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Now he is a "bishop" from the line of this "pope"?

    To be fair, it's only the priestly orders of Neal Webster that derive from Terrasson/Clemente.  +Webster was consecrated by +Slupski, who comes from the +McKenna/+desLaurier line.

    BTW, there was a controversy earlier about whether a non-priest could be directly consecrated a bishop.  Based on the essential form of episcopal consecration in the Roman Rite, I would think it not possible.  Perhaps the Eastern Rites are different, but in the Roman Rite the reference in the essential form is to completing or fulfilling "in your priest" the peak/summit of the ministry.  I doubt that would be efficacious if pronounced over a layman.

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 23967
    • Reputation: +20952/-420
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #193 on: August 01, 2020, 10:25:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If I were in his shoes, given all the issues surrounding the first doubtful/invalid attempt, I would certainly have recorded any subsequent conditional consecration, so that prospective seminarians, parents, faithful, and adversaries would have one less concern.


    Indeed! Especially with that "cesspool" of CathInfo. ::) You don't want to give those guys any rope to hang you with!

    Seriously, from his perspective we're all a bunch of Al-qaeda terrorists, and I sit in a chair all day twirling my mustache and petting a cat. Even though our collective "fraternal correction" calling out Fr./Bp. Pfeiffer is actually the best form of charity called for in this situation -- he sees it differently. From his perspective, he has many "enemies".

    If the only thing out there on the Internet forever is the video showing how slipshod the ceremony was, how frail the consecrator was, etc. I would be the first one getting that conditional consecration video out there POST HASTE.

    The correction needs to be as concrete, certain, popular, and available as the original defective ceremony *which now Fr. Pfeiffer himself admits was defective*. And might I point out that first ceremony is available everywhere "forever" since I've mirrored it on my server now. So he has to match THAT.

    If Father didn't record and/or refuses to release the conditional consecration ceremony, he has a lot to learn about marketing, propaganda, etc. You don't want the last thing people see to be a screw-up. Everyone is going to see it and walk away shaking their heads, "THAT needs to be fixed..."

    Seeing something on video? That's real. Taking Fr. Pfeiffer's word for something? Much more hit-and-miss. Proof trumps hearsay. And when it comes to verbal testimony from Fr. Pfeiffer, sometimes it's true, but many times it's not. Sad, but true. I could list many lies Fr. Pfeiffer has told publicly, but I don't have time right now. There are many threads on CI about this.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Croixalist

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1340
    • Reputation: +909/-243
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #194 on: August 01, 2020, 10:59:16 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • To be fair, it's only the priestly orders of Neal Webster that derive from Terrasson/Clemente.  +Webster was consecrated by +Slupski, who comes from the +McKenna/+desLaurier line.

    BTW, there was a controversy earlier about whether a non-priest could be directly consecrated a bishop.  Based on the essential form of episcopal consecration in the Roman Rite, I would think it not possible.  Perhaps the Eastern Rites are different, but in the Roman Rite the reference in the essential form is to completing or fulfilling "in your priest" the peak/summit of the ministry.  I doubt that would be efficacious if pronounced over a layman.

    Man, it just keeps going and going, doesn't it? If their situation hadn't been an absolute sham for years already, I might be inclined to give these over-extended lines of various doubt a chance. All I see right now are more footholds of "maybe" for the devil to operate. Everything associated with Boston at this point is in ashes.
    Fortuna finem habet.


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16