Author Topic: Fr. Pfeiffer mentions a Fr. Tetherow - who? (Read 139491 times)

Matthew · « **Reply #120 on:** March 18, 2016, 08:43:25 AM »

Quote from: AJNC

Quote from: sea leopard
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.

Indeed.

Regarding your first sentence "on another Resistance forum" -- that's almost an exaggeration. Those other "fora" mis-named after the great Archbishop Lefebvre are a complete joke now. Both of them together have had about 7 posts since Passion Sunday. Even the Admin doesn't post there. Can you say GHOST TOWN?

I'm not going to let some random verbal hitman post stuff on CathInfo, just because "it was posted elsewhere" -- when he or one of his friends merely started a quick forum on a free forum site :)

My point: It's baseless slander that you quoted, and no forum with more than a ghost town's traffic would allow such nonsense. So I'm not going to feel the least bit guilty when I delete it (which is what it deserves). I hope this clarifies things.

P.S. You (and who you got it from: Pablo, Fr. Pfeiffer's other attack dogs, etc.) can drop that number down a bit. Fr. Dominic Mary of the Pillar and Fr. Marshall Roberts are the SAME MAN. And quit mentioning that other Father, who was never accused of anything CLOSE to what we're talking about with Fr. Tetherow. With that priest, there was never even an ACCUSATION of homo, much less pedo.

But once again, Pablo loves to add confusion where good men would like to add clarity. He also likes to spread lies where most good men would prefer to discern and promote the truth.

Paul FHC · « **Reply #121 on:** March 18, 2016, 08:53:07 AM »

OLMC and it's followers must tread carefully. There may come a time when more light must be shed.

Matthew · « **Reply #122 on:** March 18, 2016, 09:04:05 AM »

Quote from: Paul FHC

OLMC and it's followers must tread carefully. There may come a time when more light must be shed.

What is this, a teaser trailer?

Either shed or get off the pot.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #123 on:** March 18, 2016, 09:13:29 AM »

To the person who asked for the affidavits and the benefit of others:

The same woman, Mrs. Louise Carbonaro, who's Affidavit my husband used in the defense of Mr. Tetherow, writes in a second affidavit:

Quote from: Affidavit from Mrs. louise Carbonaro

I briefly met Fr. Tetherow once and thought he was a heterosɛҳuąƖ priest and holy man. However, I thought the brothers that lived with him were very effeminate and wasn't sure what to think of Tetherow...

Mr. Tetherow himself gave my husband a copy of these affidavits. We thought the above quote was odd but had no idea at the time that Mr. Tetherow himself was a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. Now, in light of his own canonical case this is just another affirmation. I only have paper copies of these affidavits, they have been taken off the internet. I will fax it to anyone who would like to see them. I should repeat that Mr. Tetherow always seemed quite uncomfortable with my husband offering him to pay for a lawyer to clear his name. Ironically, it is my husband's reputation and my own that has suffered at the hands of the very man we defended.

We have pictures of Mr. Tetherow proudly labeled "St Ann, Tobyhanna, December 28. 2002" in which he is socializing with the very priests whose computers were loaded with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ porn as explained in the affidavits and where Mr. Tetherow was "FRAMED" in 2005. I can email them to Matthew, I don't know how to post pictures.

Matthew · « **Reply #124 on:** March 18, 2016, 09:39:06 AM »

Go ahead and e-mail them. I can easily post them.