After his one and a half hour talk in Post Falls, April 10, 2013, Fr. Pfluger took questions. The last question was as transcribed below. Father's answer follows. If for the readers Fr. Pfluger's response clarifies and explains the issues raised, then those readers can, perhaps, help the rest of us, who remain confused by his answer, to understand it.
Question: “Father, I have a question about the preamble of April 2012. It seems like somewhere in the preamble there is an acceptance of the new Mass under certain conditions, and there’s also and acceptance of the new code of cannon law, which allows giving the Holy Eucharist to Protestants. Is that is that true or can you clarify that?
Fr. Pflugger: You know that’s the, that’s the same uh (laughs), I think (laughs) it’s it’s interesting to see how good uh the faithful and priests are are worried and concerned about uh how he led us to Rome. You know, to, to compare with the the the text signed by the Archbishop. Take last year, nobody, whether priests or or faithful discussed about this this text by the Archbishop that was that was the text and then the situation our our uh wealth and so forth. If you if you compare the the declaration that was the Archbishop that that term is not is not ideal but the Archbishop was a response to to Rome’s proposition (in) ’88 and then he he ma-uh signed his so called doctrinal preamble – or declarational doctrinal and the title is the same in Apr, April um (coughs) last year, that’s not a that’s not a declaration about our position of what we believe or what’s traditional or all the errors in the council, that’s a that’s a minimum to to propose Rome to continue on this on this uh contact with Rome or the canonical regularization. But that’s now done you know that’s uh, we withdrawd and Rome didn’t accept. Now I, I have now a a beautiful letter from from Bishop Tissier because Bishop Williamson writing to all the priests in the whole world to to um to act against the order capitulance (inaudible) Bishop Williams--Bishop Tissier sent a letter saying you can you can spread and publish this letter to the whole world. And he said, why Bishop Williamson is discussing now one year later, he knew the text. At that time he didn’t come to Menzingen and say “stop, you cannot do” no, now one year later after all the the end of and again we withdraw and the declaration by the chapter made the conditions and so forth and Rome did not accept why now trouble and worry the faithful about something that’s you know that’s the past. It it made no sense you know to to uh I think that’s not a good spirit now to analyze every sentence and word and and uh comma and uh yes and no you know. That’s not that’s a lost time. And it’s a it’s a bad spirit it’s troubling and and uh it’s a spirit of dialectism dialectic and it’s it’s a liberal spirit it’s against authority. He did, and we did and we. At that time we thought that and we had we had theologians they they they they gave their councel and said “that’s ok” you have others they say that’s not ok but now it’s it’s April 2012 and now we are in April 2013 you know, um it make no sense it’s senseless to to analyze. Sure, you could, uh you can do better but at that time we did so and that was the situation and we had 4 weeks to to respond and and we had, you know that was the problem from the beginning from uh 2007 or 2009. Rome is calling to Mezingen, the Pope, and they they want know our position about precise uh uh point. They know our what we think and what we believe and what we mean about the council and the the Canon Law and the new mass. You know that’s uh, it’s not a moment to say uh uh It’s like our priest in Sunday in the Creed. They we say the Credo in unum Deum and all the articles but, not at the end, I denouncing all the errors in the council by refusing all the modern errors (audience laughs). A little bit uh common sense, no. That’s a, what’s the purpose? That you ask this question, what’s the purpose by these priests, who are organizing this rebellion? Publishing anonymous letters around the world? What’s what’s the purpose? Is this for for God’s glory? For the truth? For the salvation of souls? Or is this to to destroy? To yes is in a dialectic view to to trouble. And now they have to justify their their uh their position, They have now to, you know sometimes if you, don’t do it, but if you read all these uh some comments or or commentaries you could think the biggest, the biggest enemy the biggest problem in the in the in the church is Bishop Fellay. The biggest enemy against the truth, and the and and, please (audience laughing). We have to see the reality. That we have attacks, that we have a we have a fight against against Christen, Christianity. And we have uh uh Islam and so forth. And we have, we have uh a loss of faith. And now we we fight against, and we that’s a shame that’s a that’s a pity for the world, and that’s a that’s a pity for all the enemies of the church. Seeing in tradition they fight and accusing and liberal. In my youth, in the ‘70s, I’m a little bit older than you father (audience laughs), the worst was Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, and then the Jєωs, and now liberalism liberalism is blasphemy. Now please, please forget all this stupid and narrow minded and cantankerous mentality, “I have right and I know better!”. We have to see the the the aim, the purpose and that’s, that’s to become saints.
Topic: Fr. Pfluger takes a question and answers it, (Read 3143 times)