My husband and I just spoke on the phone with someone who ask for permission to pass on my posts to Fr. Pfeiffer. I told him it was public information and that I post with the understanding that every one knows my identity (Fr. Kramer made that clear on a long thread a while ago). For the record, I'm C. Drew, wife of David Drew who publicly defended Mr. Tetherow and who publicly offered a retraction and apology of his defense (2010). This retraction was written long before we got Mr. Tetherow's canonical papers. The gentleman we spoke to had never seen this before :

For those who have never seen it, here it is:

Retraction of my defense of Fr. Virgil Bradley (Gabriel) Tetherow offered with a public apology:

I first met Fr. Virgil Bradley (Gabriel) Tetherow when he was a Franciscan seminarian and was favorably impressed. I believed him to be honest and upright of character. When he told me that he was innocent of intentionally downloading child pornography and was not able to defend himself against these charges without compromising the confessional seal, I made an effort to examine the particulars of his case and found sufficient circuмstantial evidence to support a reasonable doubt to question the truth of the charges against him. His excuse for entering a plea bargain with the prosecution was simple moral weakness, seeking an end to an ugly situation while lacking financial and diocesan support. Human failures of this kind, although not approved, are understandable. My decision to defend Fr. Virgil Bradley (Gabriel) Tetherow was grounded firstly and primarily upon the personal worth of his character, secondly, upon the obligation of every Catholic to help restore the unjustly damaged reputation of others, but especially a Catholic priest, and lastly upon the particular evidence relating to the charges of downloading child pornography.

Over the last two years, but particularly over the last six months, I have gotten to know Fr. Virgil Bradley (Gabriel) Tetherow far better. I admit to having made a serious error in judgment of his character. He has been repeatedly caught in acts of deceit, detraction and calumny supported by several witnesses. The evidence of habitual and willful moral failings was placed before expert legal counsel who advised his immediate removal. It was also placed before an elderly priest, a canon lawyer of sound judgment, who, after a thorough investigation, said that I had an obligation to remove him directly as well as a moral responsibility to make amends for having brought him to our Mission. This priest said from the pulpit of Ss. Peter and Paul Chapel in York on June 13, 2010 that “he was removed for cause and the cause was just.” He also shared the evidence with another elderly priest, who regularly assists at SSPX chapels, who also agreed with his removal.

I can no longer justify any assumption of Fr. Tetherow’s claim of innocence with regard to his criminal conviction. He has deceived me, and he continues to deceive many others, that he is a man of virtue, but the truth always comes out in the end. It is with regret, but with a sense of moral obligation, that I hereby formally retract anything I have said or written in his defense. I apologize to anyone who may, based upon my defense, have presumed that he has been unjustly persecuted by the judicial authorities and the diocesan officials in Scranton. His public record is that of a convicted felon on child pornography related charges, and I caution anyone, who places themselves or their families in his trust, to bear this fact in mind.

David M. Drew
Chairman
Saints Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission

My husband and I just spoke on the phone with someone who ask for permission to pass on my posts to Fr. Pfeiffer. I told him it was public information and that I post with the understanding that every one knows my identity (Fr. Kramer made that clear on a long thread a while ago). For the record, I'm C. Drew, wife of David Drew who publicly defended Mr. Tetherow and who publicly offered a retraction and apology of his defense (2010). This retraction was written long before we got Mr. Tetherow's canonical papers. The gentleman we spoke to had never seen this before :

For those who have never seen it, here it is:

Quote

Retraction of my defense of Fr. Virgil Bradley (Gabriel) Tetherow offered with a public apology:

I first met Fr. Virgil Bradley (Gabriel) Tetherow when he was a Franciscan seminarian and was favorably impressed. I believed him to be honest and upright of character. When he told me that he was innocent of intentionally downloading child pornography and was not able to defend himself against these charges without compromising the confessional seal, I made an effort to examine the particulars of his case and found sufficient circuмstantial evidence to support a reasonable doubt to question the truth of the charges against him. His excuse for entering a plea bargain with the prosecution was simple moral weakness, seeking an end to an ugly situation while lacking financial and diocesan support. Human failures of this kind, although not approved, are understandable. My decision to defend Fr. Virgil Bradley (Gabriel) Tetherow was grounded firstly and primarily upon the personal worth of his character, secondly, upon the obligation of every Catholic to help restore the unjustly damaged reputation of others, but especially a Catholic priest, and lastly upon the particular evidence relating to the charges of downloading child pornography.

Over the last two years, but particularly over the last six months, I have gotten to know Fr. Virgil Bradley (Gabriel) Tetherow far better. I admit to having made a serious error in judgment of his character. He has been repeatedly caught in acts of deceit, detraction and calumny supported by several witnesses. The evidence of habitual and willful moral failings was placed before expert legal counsel who advised his immediate removal. It was also placed before an elderly priest, a canon lawyer of sound judgment, who, after a thorough investigation, said that I had an obligation to remove him directly as well as a moral responsibility to make amends for having brought him to our Mission. This priest said from the pulpit of Ss. Peter and Paul Chapel in York on June 13, 2010 that “he was removed for cause and the cause was just.” He also shared the evidence with another elderly priest, who regularly assists at SSPX chapels, who also agreed with his removal.

I can no longer justify any assumption of Fr. Tetherow’s claim of innocence with regard to his criminal conviction. He has deceived me, and he continues to deceive many others, that he is a man of virtue, but the truth always comes out in the end. It is with regret, but with a sense of moral obligation, that I hereby formally retract anything I have said or written in his defense. I apologize to anyone who may, based upon my defense, have presumed that he has been unjustly persecuted by the judicial authorities and the diocesan officials in Scranton. His public record is that of a convicted felon on child pornography related charges, and I caution anyone, who places themselves or their families in his trust, to bear this fact in mind.

David M. Drew
Chairman
Saints Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission

Thank you for sharing this valuable information.

I apologize for the comment on Fr. Perricone. It was not prudent on my part.

I apologize for the comment on Fr. Perricone. It was not prudent on my part.

For the sake of our children we need to know about any special friendship between Fr. Teherow and Fr. Perricone. Lord have mercy.

When I grew up, it was the age of innocence, but children my age were being molested in secret in Irish orphanages, in boarding schools, in Franciscan seminaries, etc. Children could not complain because their parents and priests would not believe them, they would be branded as liars, and their lives would be ruined. So they remained silent.

Innocence lost

When my son grew up, it was all over the news, in print, on the TV, on the radio, and on the Internet. We screened the news and only watched the nightly news so that he would not be offended. However, when he was only four years old, he started to read the newspapers. We did not realize this until he stated that he did not want to attend Mass because he was afraid of the priests and what he had read in the newspapers about a certain Father Kelly who had escaped to Ireland. This priest was an associate pastor in our parish. Therefore, when he made his first confession three years later, he was absolutely terrified of priests.

I have no certainty. A lady who lived in NYC for a long time and gets around (in her late fifties) claims to have known both priests for a long time and assures me that is the case but don't know her well enough to form my conscience. All I know for certain is that Mr. Tetherow went directly to Fr. Perricone when he took over the chapel and became his assistant until his arrest.

I tried commenting on the YouTube video, but someone kept deleting my comments.  Maybe they didn't like what I had to say...  :confused1:

AJNC..

Please....... Your definition of a pedophile..
.
.   Your accusation  if they are "known".
.
.NAME THEM PLEASE.
.
(not shouting, for effect only)

Not my accusation at all! Was mentioning a post on another Resistance forum.

My only input was to wonder how a loose association (of bishops and priests ) produces such a thing. There are (non-SSPX) Traditional Catholic bishops and priests in Europe, Mexico and the US in loose association with one another for many years now and there seem to be no problems.

AJNC,

If you thought you needed to post random s*** from Pablo on this forum, I'm here to clarify: you don't.

There's a reason I banned pablo from this forum.

Morality doesn't even ENTER THE PICTURE when Pablo decides what he's going to do and going to say. Slandering a priest is all the same to him as praising another priest. Sin has become that habitual and easy for him.