Author Topic: Fr. Pfeiffer mentions a Fr. Tetherow - who? (Read 139621 times)

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #125 on:** March 18, 2016, 09:50:47 AM »

Matthew, please PM an email address I can use from my cell phone. I will take pictures of the photos and send you the originals if you want. There are two labeled pictures 8x10 but one of them has the assistant Pastor in the front and Mr. Tetherow in the background in his Franciscan habit as we met him (with a beard).

AJNC · « **Reply #126 on:** March 18, 2016, 09:54:54 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

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.

I have absolutely nothing to do with this Pablo guy. Nothing at all. I knew Fr Pfeiffer very well when he was in India and I came to my own conclusion about him long before I ever heard about this Pablo.

I was browsing that forum earlier today and I saw the comment. Why did I quote it here? Because the post mentioned these priests and because such a situation, even if true, was blamed on the "loose association".

OHCA · « **Reply #127 on:** March 18, 2016, 10:00:35 AM »

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora

I should repeat that Mr. Tetherow always seemed quite uncomfortable with my husband offering him to pay for a lawyer to clear his name.

Big clue.

Matthew · « **Reply #128 on:** March 18, 2016, 10:04:00 AM »

Quote from: AJNC

Quote from: Matthew
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.

I have absolutely nothing to do with this Pablo guy. Nothing at all. I knew Fr Pfeiffer very well when he was in India and I came to my own conclusion about him long before I ever heard about this Pablo.

I was browsing that forum earlier today and I saw the comment. Why did I quote it here? Because the post mentioned these priests and because such a situation, even if true, was blamed on the "loose association".

Well you and I both know that his blaming on the "loose association" is crap; you yourself gave the reason! Plenty of Trad groups have been independent or loosely associated over the years and never had a problem with pedophilia.

And basic logic would suffice, don't you think?

What part of having a loose network of independent chapels (rather than a strong authoritative structure like the SSPX) causes a few priests to A) become ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and B) prey upon children?

Just take your average priest -- do you think the power structure of the organization he's a part of is going to change his temptations to sins of the 6th/9th even 0.00001%? Of course not! Why would it?

And by the way, there hasn't been a single incident of sɛҳuąƖ abuse in the Resistance. Whatever priests have skeletons in their closets -- Fr. Tetherow included -- already had those skeletons safely stored away before the Resistance was even born. So why try to correlate the two, unless you are insane? (I guess that explains it then, doesn't it? Pablo is insane)

There is simply no causation there.

Matthew · « **Reply #129 on:** March 18, 2016, 10:15:11 AM »

Actually, I should clarify what I said.

Pablo isn't insane, he's crazy like a fox. He's part of Fr. Pfeiffer's team of hitmen, who have been enlisted to DESTROY THE RESISTANCE.

Yes, you heard me right. Fr. Pfeiffer & Co. want to destroy the entire Resistance at large. If they had the ability, they would convince every Trad man, woman and child to avoid
+Williamson
+Faure
Fr. Zendejas
Fr. Garcia
Fr. Voigt
etc.
etc.

And the same would happen to buildings and chapels not in union with Boston, KY: +Faure's seminary, Fr. Zendejas' chapels, etc.

He would like to have LITERALLY on the street pretty much every Resistant priest that isn't Fr. Pfeiffer or Fr. Hewko, or perhaps a few others who acknowledge Fr. Pfeiffer's "primacy". Or perhaps rather than wanting to see them homeless, he'd prefer to take them in under his wing and wise guidance.

Why would Fr. Pfeiffer want to decimate the Resistance in this way?

The answer is simple. Back in 2013, Fr. Pfeiffer WAS the Resistance. That was probably the best year of his life. He was flying high, in demand, everyone he saw (Resistance faithful all around the US and around the world) was happy to see him. Everyone wanted him. That did wonders for his ego. Things were growing and "happening", and Fr. Pfeiffer lives off excitement.

If he could somehow turn back the clock, or turn back the growth of the Resistance to 2013 levels -- back to its infancy (which would require lots of DESTRUCTION at this point, let's face it!), then Father would be in demand again.

His motivation is so obvious a baby could figure it out.

If we took everything he said at face value, just look at the picture it would paint. All the Resistance outside Boston, KY is a no-go, the SSPX is a no-go, sedevacantism is a no-go, Ambrose is a valid bishop, I'm running a seminary, the world needs priests/bishops, there are almost no priests/bishops left, It's us vs. the entire world, we're being persecuted, that's why Ambrose consecrated me a bishop...

You get the picture. Again, it doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out Fr. Pfeiffer's motivations. Just listen to everything he says and put it all together, to figure out his goals and how he sees the world.