Author Topic: Fr. Pfeiffers Sermon on Ambrose (Read 4282 times)

Chiara · « **on:** October 06, 2015, 10:06:50 PM »

This is the sermon in Portales, NM on October 3, 2015.
Any comments?

Matto · « **Reply #1 on:** October 06, 2015, 10:08:40 PM »

I will watch later tonight.

Matthew · « **Reply #2 on:** October 06, 2015, 10:10:15 PM »

Someone commented on this sermon, that Fr. Pfeiffer is still pushing this "bishop" Moran, and that he's been in contact with him for over 6 months.

There's quite a believable hypothesis that Fr. Pfeiffer has in fact already had himself consecrated by this "bishop", and is only waiting on the official announcement of his new title until he digs up sufficient proof of bishop/father/mr. Moran's legitimacy -- or at least what will pass as proof for the majority of his supporters.

What lends credibility to this hypothesis:

Quote from: Fr. Voigt

“boss”, I have learned firsthand of the change in your life.

Fr. Voigt: if Fr. Pfeiffer getting himself consecrated isn't what you meant by this, could you please clarify what you meant? Perhaps by thus leaving it vague you are just forcing us all to think the worst...

MaterDominici · « **Reply #3 on:** October 07, 2015, 02:23:50 AM »

Comment #1 - Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko are not on the same page as to whether or not their investigation of Ambrose is complete. Fr. Pfeiffer says that it was only after they investigated and found no problems that they allowed him to say Mass at OLMC, but Fr. Hewko after that point said that they were still investigating.

Comment #2 - Father says that in his investigation he spoke with other priests and other people, but doesn't give any names. So, there is at least someone out there that knows this guy, but Father isn't yet saying who those people are.

Comment #3 - Fr. Pfeiffer only says that the information on the internet regarding Ambrose is "not true". He is not specific again, but says that they looked into the accusations and found they are not true. (Note here that he can't be referring to anything said in the past 2 weeks as his investigation was complete before that point.) I'm not certain how information spread out over multiple sites and forums about him joining an Orthodox group in 2007 could be false. This also is somewhat different than Fr. Hewko's statement that Ambrose's Orthodox history was questionably due to his attempt at converting them which would be entirely different than claiming it is "not true".

Comment #4 - Fr. Pfeiffer is distancing himself from Ambrose by mentioning things like (1) OLMC having been hoodwinked by a skilled con is a possibility (2) OLMC is not "aligning" themselves with anyone. But, at the same time he does not object to Ambrose saying Mass for the Resistance faithful in other places as he "visits" them. Fr. Pfeiffer was confident at the beginning that the things on the internet about Ambrose were investigated and found to be not true, but then later keeps open the possibility that he's found to be a fraud and has to be cast out.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #4 on:** October 07, 2015, 06:21:40 AM »

Check this out at minute 51:00.

Fr. Pfeiffer speaks about finding a bishop.

Paul FHC · « **Reply #5 on:** October 07, 2015, 06:25:51 AM »

Internet research is not my strength, but the genuine orthodox church of America(who claim that Ambrose was a part of their organization) are certainly schismatic as their official apologetic website shows the Roman church to be in heresy for several hundred years.
Www.trueorthodoxy.info/pdf/visual_time_line.pdf

JPaul · « **Reply #6 on:** October 07, 2015, 08:06:37 AM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

Comment #1 - Frs. Pfeiffer and Hewko are not on the same page as to whether or not their investigation of Ambrose is complete. Fr. Pfeiffer says that it was only after they investigated and found no problems that they allowed him to say Mass at OLMC, but Fr. Hewko after that point said that they were still investigating.

Comment #2 - Father says that in his investigation he spoke with other priests and other people, but doesn't give any names. So, there is at least someone out there that knows this guy, but Father isn't yet saying who those people are.

Comment #3 - Fr. Pfeiffer only says that the information on the internet regarding Ambrose is "not true". He is not specific again, but says that they looked into the accusations and found they are not true. (Note here that he can't be referring to anything said in the past 2 weeks as his investigation was complete before that point.) I'm not certain how information spread out over multiple sites and forums about him joining an Orthodox group in 2007 could be false. This also is somewhat different than Fr. Hewko's statement that Ambrose's Orthodox history was questionably due to his attempt at converting them which would be entirely different than claiming it is "not true".

Comment #4 - Fr. Pfeiffer is distancing himself from Ambrose by mentioning things like (1) OLMC having been hoodwinked by a skilled con is a possibility (2) OLMC is not "aligning" themselves with anyone. But, at the same time he does not object to Ambrose saying Mass for the Resistance faithful in other places as he "visits" them. Fr. Pfeiffer was confident at the beginning that the things on the internet about Ambrose were investigated and found to be not true, but then later keeps open the possibility that he's found to be a fraud and has to be cast out.

It seem that Father is playing both ends against the middle, speaking much, saying little. He is beginning to sound more and more like his "Superior" by the day.

Matthew · « **Reply #7 on:** October 07, 2015, 10:28:37 AM »

Quote from: Centroamerica

Check this out at minute 51:00.

Fr. Pfeiffer speaks about finding a bishop.

How about 55:30, the nice Freudian slip.

"You can get a sedevacantist bishop to or... to consecrate, right? ... ordain your guys..."

Consecrating is making a priest into a bishop. Is that what's on his mind?

Centroamerica · « **Reply #8 on:** October 07, 2015, 10:29:51 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: Centroamerica
Check this out at minute 51:00.

Fr. Pfeiffer speaks about finding a bishop.

How about 55:30, the nice Freudian slip.

"You can get a sedevacantist bishop to or... to consecrate, right? ... ordain your guys..."

Consecrating is making a priest into a bishop. Is that what's on his mind?

Exactly.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #9 on:** October 07, 2015, 02:11:45 PM »

Matthew:

Quote

How about 55:30, the nice Freudian slip.

"You can get a sedevacantist bishop to or... to consecrate, right? ... ordain your guys..."

Consecrating is making a priest into a bishop. Is that what's on his mind?

Matt, you highlighted in an earlier post somewhere a phrase from one of Fr. Voigt's remarks in his letter, viz.
" ...,I have learned firsthand of the change in your, (Fr. P's) life..."

I asked Fr. Voigt specifically about that quote. He disabused me of any idea that it had to do with any alleged aspiration to the Episcopacy on the part of Father Pfeiffer. It was simply an observation that Father's behavior had earlier been pretty "cheerful" and his attitude, normally, pretty "youthful." But, I suppose, as the problems and pressures with the seminary and with Pablo grew, he had become more of a "tyrant." Father V. would not acknowledge that that "change" was referring in any way to Bp. Ambrose or to Fr. P's wanting, perhaps, to become a bishop by the former's eventual consecration of him. I just wanted to make that clear.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #10 on:** October 07, 2015, 03:34:45 PM »

Thank you for the clarification, Hollingsworth.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #11 on:** October 08, 2015, 03:37:13 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: Centroamerica
Check this out at minute 51:00.

Fr. Pfeiffer speaks about finding a bishop.

How about 55:30, the nice Freudian slip.

"You can get a sedevacantist bishop to or... to consecrate, right? ... ordain your guys..."

Consecrating is making a priest into a bishop. Is that what's on his mind?

Father Pfeiffer also takes a disturbingly irreverent tone towards St. Joseph and Our Lady; it's highly redolent of the typical Novus Ordo swill you'd hear. St. Joseph was a "stubborn guy" (really?), and Our Lady "could have tried to manipulate" St. Joseph. Are you kidding me? Am I hearing this from a Traditional Catholic priest?

Matthew · « **Reply #12 on:** October 08, 2015, 03:41:05 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Matthew
Quote from: Centroamerica
Check this out at minute 51:00.

Fr. Pfeiffer speaks about finding a bishop.

How about 55:30, the nice Freudian slip.

"You can get a sedevacantist bishop to or... to consecrate, right? ... ordain your guys..."

Consecrating is making a priest into a bishop. Is that what's on his mind?

Father Pfeiffer also takes a disturbingly irreverent tone towards St. Joseph and Our Lady; it's highly redolent of the typical Novus Ordo swill you'd hear. St. Joseph was a "stubborn guy" (really?), and Our Lady "could have tried to manipulate" St. Joseph. Are you kidding me? Am I hearing this from a Traditional Catholic priest?

I agree --

That part took me aback as well, but sometimes it's hard to know when to start and when to stop, when criticizing Fr. Pfeiffer...

I also noticed his use of humor to get his point across, "Bethlehem looks great this time of year!" and all that. I think it could be said that priests using humor in their sermons are after the "smiles" and approval of their flocks, and are a bit too attached to themselves. Speaking in general, here, not just Fr. Pfeiffer.

The saints didn't use humor in their sermons for any reason. Sermons should be serious. Am I wrong? First let's find a canonized priest (there aren't many; all I have here in my bag is the Cure of Ars). Did he ever joke during his sermons? I rest my case. He might CRY at the thought of souls being lost...

Trying to be witty, funny, unique is always about drawing attention to oneself. Am I wrong about this?

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #13 on:** October 08, 2015, 08:31:02 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: Ladislaus
Quote from: Matthew
Quote from: Centroamerica
Check this out at minute 51:00.

Fr. Pfeiffer speaks about finding a bishop.

How about 55:30, the nice Freudian slip.

"You can get a sedevacantist bishop to or... to consecrate, right? ... ordain your guys..."

Consecrating is making a priest into a bishop. Is that what's on his mind?

Father Pfeiffer also takes a disturbingly irreverent tone towards St. Joseph and Our Lady; it's highly redolent of the typical Novus Ordo swill you'd hear. St. Joseph was a "stubborn guy" (really?), and Our Lady "could have tried to manipulate" St. Joseph. Are you kidding me? Am I hearing this from a Traditional Catholic priest?

I agree --

That part took me aback as well, but sometimes it's hard to know when to start and when to stop, when criticizing Fr. Pfeiffer...

I also noticed his use of humor to get his point across, "Bethlehem looks great this time of year!" and all that. I think it could be said that priests using humor in their sermons are after the "smiles" and approval of their flocks, and are a bit too attached to themselves. Speaking in general, here, not just Fr. Pfeiffer.

The saints didn't use humor in their sermons for any reason. Sermons should be serious. Am I wrong? First let's find a canonized priest (there aren't many; all I have here in my bag is the Cure of Ars). Did he ever joke during his sermons? I rest my case. He might CRY at the thought of souls being lost...

Trying to be witty, funny, unique is always about drawing attention to oneself. Am I wrong about this?

This whole scenario is quite hurtful to me. I have been following the sermons of Fr. Pfeiffer for almost 2 years and have been telling friends that he is the most gifted orator I have heard among priests. To see this controversy erupt around him and his ministry is extremely painful to me.

Now he's making jokes that make the Holy Family a mockery?!

I don't know about you, but I have met several people (generally non-Christian) who have made it a hobby of sorts to collect jokes about our Lady, our Lord and St. Joseph. When I don't laugh at them, they somehow don't take the hint, and feel obliged to try to EXPLAIN to me why they're supposed to be funny.

Any priest who uses a silly scene in the life of the Holy Family to evoke chuckles from his hearers is not doing a good work, but rather, just as singing "Rock of Ages" or "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God" (or any OTHER hymn belonging to heretics) in Church gives the listener a moment to think, "Oh, I guess the Catholic Church is now on board with the Protestants," so too, this business of making our Lord and Lady the brunt of jokes drags the listeners down to rank Protestantism, or worse.

Therefore, those who laugh at Fr. Pheiffer's description of how our Lady may have suggested Bethlehem to St. Joseph may as well titter away at some of the jokes that I wouldn't dare repeat because they're far too vile and debase and impure. Why not? If our Lady is the brunt of your joke, why not laugh about certain aspects of say, other women, in her regard?

If you don't know the answer to that, my explaining it won't make any difference.

.

TheRealMcCoy · « **Reply #14 on:** October 08, 2015, 08:53:23 PM »

Bethlehem was the chosen place from all Eternity, not because someone couldn't find the right exit off the highway.