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

Author Topic: Fr. Pfeiffer mentions a Fr. Tetherow - who?  (Read 139522 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Maria Auxiliadora

  • Supporter
Fr. Pfeiffer mentions a Fr. Tetherow - who?
« Reply #105 on: March 17, 2016, 03:52:57 PM »
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



Fr. Pfeiffer mentions a Fr. Tetherow - who?
« Reply #106 on: March 17, 2016, 06:03:30 PM »
Thanks for sharing the retraction statement MA.  

Its a substantial character statement for Mr. Tetherow.

If Fr. Pfeiffer was duped too, why won't he admit it?








Fr. Pfeiffer mentions a Fr. Tetherow - who?
« Reply #107 on: March 17, 2016, 06:54:02 PM »
Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora
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.


Offline Maria Auxiliadora

  • Supporter
Fr. Pfeiffer mentions a Fr. Tetherow - who?
« Reply #108 on: March 17, 2016, 08:10:20 PM »
Quote from: 1st Mansion Tenant
Quote from: Matthew
From the mailbag:

Quote
Dear cathinfo

Fr Tetherow is also on Bishop Accountablitiy
What caught my eye was an arrest in West Orange NJ at At Anthony of Padua
This is the original chapel Fr Wickens started and was turned over to the diocese of Newark after his death.
Fr Tetherow also states he was Mr Oregon sometime after high school on his classmate account
Fr Tetherow has also been serving a small chapel in southern NJ.
Also, in 2013 his name appeared on your site on an anonymous thread.

There is a lot on this ex priest, keep digging.

Concerned in NJ





http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news3/2005_03_18_Birk_PriestFaces_Virgil_Tetherow_2.htm


Quote from: link above
On Jan. 31, Father Tetherow drove to Pocono Mountain police headquarters and admitted to downloading child porn from January to December 2004 on the secretary's computer as well as the one in his rectory room , according to the criminal complaint.

A search executed days later on the computer from Father Tetherow's room uncovered more than 10 images of children between the ages of 9 to 13 engaged in sɛҳuąƖ acts or simulated acts.

He had been accessing the Internet with the user name "Father Gabriel," according to the complaint. Earlier this winter, Father Tetherow had been working at St. Anthony of Padua in West Orange, N.J., brought in by friend and pastor the Rev. John Perricone.


Is anyone here familiar with Fr. Perricone? I never met him but have been told by several people who have attended St. Anthony's chapel, Orange, NJ (Well known to have been willed to the SSPX) that he is a "notorious ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ" in the diocese of Newark. Any comments? My sources seem very reliable.

The quotes in bold are for the gentleman who called us today.

Offline Maria Auxiliadora

  • Supporter
Fr. Pfeiffer mentions a Fr. Tetherow - who?
« Reply #109 on: March 17, 2016, 09:03:03 PM »
I apologize for the comment on Fr. Perricone. It was not prudent on my part.