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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 30

Author Topic: Bishop Pfeiffer  (Read 30854 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 41891
  • Reputation: +23940/-4344
  • Gender: Male
Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
« Reply #330 on: August 18, 2020, 05:54:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Venantius0518 on August 18, 2020, 05:27:08 PM
    I haven't seen it, but one of his "seminarians" told me it exists and that they will not release it.
    .
    There is only one consideration now:
    It was botched the second time around, same as the first.

    I can only think one other reason, extreme pride.  He's continuing to cling to his assertion that the first one was valid and that there was no need for a conditional afterwards.  He INSISTS that everyone merely take his word for it and if you don't, then tough.
    Logged

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-484
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #331 on: August 18, 2020, 07:36:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/docuмents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19830312_poenae-canonicae_en.html

    Quote
    Finally, as regards those who have already received ordination [from Abp Thuc] in this illicit manner, or who will perhaps receive ordination from them, whatever about the validity of the orders, the Church does not nor shall it recognize their ordination, and as regards all juridical effects, it considers them in the state which each one had previously, and the above-mentioned penal sanctions remain in force until repentance.
    Logged

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8901
    • Reputation: +8675/-849
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #332 on: August 18, 2020, 07:52:02 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • Just a thought... but maybe the Holy Ghost was at work here?

    When a Catholic priest willfully allows himself to become dependent and subservient to an occult entity, such as a warlock... 

    .. could the Holy Ghost refuse His special outpouring of grace for the episcopal consecration?

    Bishop Webster is likely validly consecrated, but he was unable to transmit the Apostolic line to a priest that had let an occult entity occupy his soul.

    Similar to when a person sacrilegiously receives the Holy Eucharist with a mortal sin on their soul... Our Lord cannot be with them.

    Only in Fr. Pfeiffer’s attempt to receive the episcopal consecration, it was blocked through other means, providentially.
    Logged
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4452
    • Reputation: +5061/-436
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #333 on: August 18, 2020, 08:06:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Incredulous on August 18, 2020, 07:52:02 PM
    Just a thought... but maybe the Holy Ghost was at work here?

    When a Catholic priest willfully allows himself to become dependent and subservient to an occult entity, such as a warlock...

    .. could the Holy Ghost refuse His special outpouring of grace for the episcopal consecration?

    Bishop Webster is likely validly consecrated, but he was unable to transmit the Apostolic line to a priest that had let an occult entity occupy his soul.

    Similar to when a person sacrilegiously receives the Holy Eucharist with a mortal sin on their soul... Our Lord cannot be with them.

    Only in Fr. Pfeiffer’s attempt to receive the episcopal consecration, it was blocked through other means, providentially.
    .
    Makes sense. If the Holy Ghost is a Donatist, that is. 
    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).

    Offline Seraphina

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2937
    • Reputation: +2052/-184
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #334 on: August 19, 2020, 12:18:34 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Incredulous on August 18, 2020, 07:52:02 PM
    Just a thought... but maybe the Holy Ghost was at work here?

    When a Catholic priest willfully allows himself to become dependent and subservient to an occult entity, such as a warlock...

    .. could the Holy Ghost refuse His special outpouring of grace for the episcopal consecration?

    Bishop Webster is likely validly consecrated, but he was unable to transmit the Apostolic line to a priest that had let an occult entity occupy his soul.

    Similar to when a person sacrilegiously receives the Holy Eucharist with a mortal sin on their soul... Our Lord cannot be with them.

    Only in Fr. Pfeiffer’s attempt to receive the episcopal consecration, it was blocked through other means, providentially.
    My thought for what it’s worth is that IF the consecration was valid, but the priest unable to receive it due to his spiritual condition, then he needs to make a good confession before the Holy Ghost gives the grace.  Example, one who is confirmed while in mortal sin IS still confirmed, but he gets no grace from it until he makes a good confession of the sin on his soul at the time, and also of receiving a sacrament in a state of mortal sin.  He does NOT need to be reconfirmed because that is impossible.  Confession removes the blockade.  
    Again, that’s assuming the consecration is valid.  
    Logged

    Offline Yeti

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 3479
    • Reputation: +2006/-447
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #335 on: August 19, 2020, 12:34:02 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Incredulous on August 18, 2020, 07:52:02 PM
    Just a thought... but maybe the Holy Ghost was at work here?

    When a Catholic priest willfully allows himself to become dependent and subservient to an occult entity, such as a warlock...

    .. could the Holy Ghost refuse His special outpouring of grace for the episcopal consecration?

    Bishop Webster is likely validly consecrated, but he was unable to transmit the Apostolic line to a priest that had let an occult entity occupy his soul.

    Similar to when a person sacrilegiously receives the Holy Eucharist with a mortal sin on their soul... Our Lord cannot be with them.

    Only in Fr. Pfeiffer’s attempt to receive the episcopal consecration, it was blocked through other means, providentially.
    The sacraments don't work this way at all. If they did, we would not be able to have any certitude about whether we received them, or whether the minister giving them to us was validly ordained/consecrated. If you have a valid minister who has the intention to do what the Church does, and he uses the right matter and form, the sacrament works, assuming the recipient meets the requirements to receive the sacrament (e.g. has a potentially fatal health condition in the case of Extreme Unction) and has the intention to receive the sacrament. Being dependent on a warlock does not prevent a person from receiving a sacrament validly.
    Logged

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8901
    • Reputation: +8675/-849
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #336 on: August 19, 2020, 12:40:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

    • Good points!

    My question was, if Bp. Webster flubbed the episcopal consecration, could it have been done by a matter of Divine providence?

    But let’s go with your points, that the Consecration would be transmitted as long as there was proper matter, form and intent.  

    The last point being that the episcopal consecrator has to have the intent to do what the Church does.

    But what about the one receiving the consecration?  I’m pretty sure he has to have the same intent.

    As in Baptism, the recipient has to believe and want to be Baptized as the Church does.   If the priest determines this is not the case, he is not to Baptize.

    In conclusion, did Fr. Pfeiffer have the intent to do what the Church does?

    You would have to ask: 

    How could he, when his loyalty is split between the Catholic Church and a warlock?

    Logged
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-484
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #337 on: August 19, 2020, 01:59:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Incredulous on August 19, 2020, 12:40:51 PM
    My question was, if Bp. Webster flubbed the episcopal consecration, could it have been done by a matter of Divine providence?
    Yes, that seems possible. That's what I thought you were suggesting to begin with.


    Quote from: Incredulous on August 19, 2020, 12:40:51 PM
    In conclusion, did Fr. Pfeiffer have the intent to do what the Church does?
    You would have to ask:
    How could he, when his loyalty is split between the Catholic Church and a warlock?
    Someone getting ordained with the sacrilegious intent to offer black masses would, I think, be ordained.

    So whatever you are thinking about divided loyalty, I don't think it would prevent the sacrament.
    Logged

    Offline confederate catholic

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 813
    • Reputation: +285/-43
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #338 on: August 19, 2020, 04:51:27 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Look let's be honest, the whole thing smells. We find out he's a bishop by someone posting a newsletter?

    The whole point of sacraments is you do them publicly. Sacraments like marriage and ordination especially to the bishopric is supposed to take place in public because there's a flock that needs them.

    The whole idea that you post a video showing a total screwup doesn't pass any type of public scrutiny if you 'secretly' have a reconstruction.

    And just to cover the point that sometimes a priest or bishop may be conditionally ordained, it may be done that way precisely because everyone saw a public ceremony in which he was raised to the order and since everything took place in the open there is no reason to think someone is hiding something.


    Run Forrest run
    As fast as you can go
    If you weren't convinced that it was rotten there before now, you have no excuse any longer
    Logged
    قامت مريم، ترتيل وفاء جحا و سلام جحا

    Offline Venantius0518

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 277
    • Reputation: +62/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #339 on: August 19, 2020, 04:59:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Incredulous on August 19, 2020, 12:40:51 PM
    Good points!

    My question was, if Bp. Webster flubbed the episcopal consecration, could it have been done by a matter of Divine providence?

    But let’s go with your points, that the Consecration would be transmitted as long as there was proper matter, form and intent.  

    The last point being that the episcopal consecrator has to have the intent to do what the Church does.

    But what about the one receiving the consecration?  I’m pretty sure he has to have the same intent.

    As in Baptism, the recipient has to believe and want to be Baptized as the Church does.   If the priest determines this is not the case, he is not to Baptize.

    In conclusion, did Fr. Pfeiffer have the intent to do what the Church does?

    You would have to ask:

    How could he, when his loyalty is split between the Catholic Church and a warlock?
    I think you are wrong here.
    Matter, form, and intent refer to the cleric performing the ceremony.
    If a person being baptized doesn't want baptism and the cleric performs it anyway, properly, the person receives the sacrament.
    .
    Until Fr. Pfeiffer proves he IS a bishop, he isn't. 
    Logged

    Offline Stanley N

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1208
    • Reputation: +530/-484
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #340 on: August 19, 2020, 07:55:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Venantius0518 on August 19, 2020, 04:59:43 PM
    I think you are wrong here.
    Matter, form, and intent refer to the cleric performing the ceremony.
    This much is true.
    However, the recipient does also need to be receptive. Receptivity is a low bar, but it can be absent. A penitent confessing without even imperfect contrition, for example, does not receive absolution.
    Quote
    If a person being baptized doesn't want baptism and the cleric performs it anyway, properly, the person receives the sacrament.
    Let's say an adult has never expressed any interest in being baptized, and is now in a coma. At best, you could baptize conditionally, on the condition that the person had some unexpressed interest in converting.

    Now, a priest who wants to be a bishop even for wrong reasons is still receptive to the sacrament, so receiptivity shouldn't be an issue in this case.

    What is an issue is that the minister (Bp Webster) appears to have garbled the form enough for the form to be doubtful.
    Logged

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +453/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #341 on: August 19, 2020, 08:17:04 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Venantius0518 on August 19, 2020, 04:59:43 PM
    If a person being baptized doesn't want baptism and the cleric performs it anyway, properly, the person receives the sacrament.

    See the decree on justification of the Council of Trent: for adults, the vote (desire) to be baptized is a necessary condition to be justified (i.e. to be baptized).
    Logged
    Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41891
    • Reputation: +23940/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #342 on: August 19, 2020, 08:29:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Struthio on August 19, 2020, 08:17:04 PM
    See the decree on justification of the Council of Trent: the vote (desire) to be baptized is a necessary condition to be justified (i.e. to be baptized).

    Nevertheless the Sacrament is validly confected ... so the recipient has the character but does not enter a state of justification.  If he later changed and went to Confession, he would then enter a state of justification without the need to be rebaptized.
    Logged

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +453/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #343 on: August 19, 2020, 08:33:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 19, 2020, 08:29:18 PM
    Nevertheless the Sacrament is validly confected ... so the recipient has the character but does not enter a state of justification.  If he later changed and went to Confession, he would then enter a state of justification without the need to be rebaptized.

    It isn't received, at all. No mark received either. The desire is a necessary condition, like Our Lord said.

    Logged
    Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8901
    • Reputation: +8675/-849
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Bishop Pfeiffer
    « Reply #344 on: August 20, 2020, 05:42:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Struthio on August 19, 2020, 08:33:09 PM
    It isn't received, at all. No mark received either. The desire is a necessary condition, like Our Lord said.

    “If he believes and is Baptized” said Our  Lord.

    I knew of a child catechumen who didn’t take it seriously.  He was being encouraged by his relatives to be Baptized.  

    The Baptism schedule was arranged, family members were present. The priest came out and met the child at the Baptismal font and asked if he wanted to be Baptized?

    The child said “No”.  

    That was the end of the service.
    Logged
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi
    Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 30
    « previous next »