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

Author Topic: Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2  (Read 4672 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline hollingsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2786
  • Reputation: +2888/-512
  • Gender: Male
Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
« on: April 12, 2013, 11:36:59 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • (Part 2 of Fr. Pfluger's letter)
    On September 11, 2001 you were beginning your Confirmations tour in Switzerland. That evening, when Islamic terrorists crashed hi-jacked aeroplanes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York and brought the Towers down, we arrived at about 6pm in Littau and Brother Anthony showed you the new church of the priory still under construction. He also mentioned something of the Twin Towers in New York with 50,000 people killed. You asked me to listen to the news. At 6.30pm the Confirmation ceremony began and you declared it was “the Jєωs”. How could you know that so fast ?  You could not. You had no information leading to any such conclusion. Many of the faithful were disappointed that you had nothing spiritual to say, a few were impressed that you seemed to have the solution so fast. From that day on, if not sooner, my colleagues and I saw clearly that basically you are never looking for the historical truth, but only for what is true for you, what you want to be true. You have, as I formulated it last year, an idealistic view of history, And at table in a priory, I said you are an idealist. You were deeply offended, as someone told me. But actually the truth goes a little further. You are the caricature of an idealist.

    There is a famous quotation attributed to you concerning the so-called “Protocols of the Sages of Sion”, namely : “God put it in men’s hands”. You thus raised the “Protocols” to the level of divine Revelation. That is inevitable if people want to believe in them, because the Tsarist government granted long ago that they were the product of its own secret service, and all further investigations led clearly to the same conclusion. Have you read any of these investigations, for instance the official account of the Berne Trial of 1934 ?  No, of course you have not. Yet you are certain that the “Protocols” are authentic. Why ?  Because you want them to be.

    It is the same with the nαzιs’ extermination of Jєωs. Did you read the book of Pressac which we had sent to you ?  Of course not. Have you read the standard work on the subject, Hilberg’s “The Extermination of European Jєωry”?  Not either. Attorney Krah recommended to you at least once to ask David Irving, a recognized expert in archives and until recently your mentor, what the facts are. You would not listen. That is hardly surprising, given that in the meantime Irving is not calling in question the mass-murder of millions of innocent Jєωs, including by gassing. On a different tack he is upholding abstruse theories on the side, but he is not so blind as to deny the obvious. But why go in for studying history ?  You know it all without having to study, because you insist on your idea of reality. Idealism, as I said.

    Thus there cannot have been any industrial mass-murder of Jєωs because you do not want there to have been. Because it does not fit your world-view. Therefore any docuмent proving that there was such mass-murder, is a forgery, and any witness testifying that there was, even if it was SS perpetrators themselves, is suborned, and every scientific researcher coming to the same conclusion is a liar. Similarly anyone not subscribing to your theories on 9/11 is not Catholic. You have put as much in writing, indeed that is your key question : as you once asked the Superior General, “Do you believe in the Twin Towers ?”

    (Part 3 tomorrow)


    Offline Mea Culpa

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 200
    • Reputation: +392/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #1 on: April 12, 2013, 12:02:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Obviously, Fr. Pfluger's arrogant, disrespectful, and belligerent demeanor is in a crude attempt at instigating a fight.

    I would really like to see how the good Bp. replied......if he did at all.  


    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +22/-13
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #2 on: April 12, 2013, 12:08:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Of course, this was just a coincidence, eh?



    If Bishop Williamson is in error on some points, the reality is that he is telling the truth about the overall nature of the Jєωιѕн role in history, which you judaizers are denying.

    Bishop Williamson did not claim the Protocols are Divine Revelation.  That is a lie.

    The people who make the conventional h0Ɩ0cαųst narrative dogma act are only interested in hiding the real truth about why, just as the Jєωs have attempted to change, in the eyes of the world, church teaching on the Jєωs and their role in the persecution of the Church since the Crucifixion.

    " Similarly anyone not subscribing to your theories on 9/11 is not Catholic."

    Clearly another lying distortion of what Bishop Williamson has said.

    The neo-SSPX can always be smelled by their tendency to lie.

    Offline s2srea

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5106
    • Reputation: +3896/-48
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #3 on: April 12, 2013, 12:14:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: hollingsworth
    You asked me to listen to the news. At 6.30pm the Confirmation ceremony began and you declared it was “the Jєωs”. How could you know that so fast ?  You could not. You had no information leading to any such conclusion. Many of the faithful were disappointed that you had nothing spiritual to say, a few were impressed that you seemed to have the solution so fast.


    Yes- the naieve Americanists could never admit their government had a role to play in the murder of so many of their own. Their cherished 'Christian' country can do no wrong.


    Quote
    From that day on, if not sooner, my colleagues and I saw clearly that basically you are never looking for the historical truth, but only for what is true for you, what you want to be true.


    Translation: From that day on, my colleagues and I saw clearly that basically you are going to paint us in a bad light by standing for what's right. You would clearly be a hindrance to our cause.

    Offline Ekim

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 791
    • Reputation: +818/-103
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #4 on: April 12, 2013, 12:56:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • There are two sides to every story.  I would like to hear + Williamsons reply.  However, pardon me while I play Devils Advocate, it seems as if Herr Vater Pfluger has reached a braking point with +Williamsons conspiracy theories and has blurted out all his frustration in this letter (imprudently, and disrespectfully).  Perhaps he just lost himself b/c he and the good Bishop have a level of familiarity as one brother would have with another?  Frustration caused him to push due respect aside?    I must admit, I would have to agree, that if His Excellency really did gave a Confirmation sermon declaring the Jєωs responsible for 9-11 tragedy, just hours after the event took place, I'd have to agree that it would be a bit premature as well as inapropriate at such a venue.

    I wish the entire letter could be posted at once but am glad for the nuggets as we recieve them...Than you.


    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +22/-13
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #5 on: April 12, 2013, 12:59:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ekim
    There are two sides to every story.  I would like to hear + Williamsons reply.  However, pardon me while I play Devils Advocate, it seems as if Herr Vater Pfluger has reached a braking point with +Williamsons conspiracy theories and has blurted out all his frustration in this letter (imprudently, and disrespectfully).  Perhaps he just lost himself b/c he and the good Bishop have a level of familiarity as one brother would have with another?  Frustration caused him to push due respect aside?    I must admit, I would have to agree, that if His Excellency really did gave a Confirmation sermon declaring the Jєωs responsible for 9-11 tragedy, just hours after the event took place, I'd have to agree that it would be a bit premature as well as inapropriate at such a venue.

    I wish the entire letter could be posted at once but am glad for the nuggets as we recieve them...Than you.


    This was a calculated provocation.  They wanted Bishop Williamson out, they had to build consensus before expelling him.

    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12713
    • Reputation: +22/-13
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #6 on: April 12, 2013, 01:01:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    I figured my time with Fr. Phluger would be rather limited so I immediately cut to the chase in inquiring about the status of Bp. Williamson. In the course of our talk, Fr. Phluger made some pointed derogatory statements about Bp. Williamson. These were topped off by his stunning assertion with respect to Bp. Williamson and this is verbatim: "He's a nαzι." As God is my witness that is exactly what this priest told me face to face.


    http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2011/10/letter-from-bishop-fellay-to-bishop.html

    Offline s2srea

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5106
    • Reputation: +3896/-48
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #7 on: April 12, 2013, 01:10:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Telesphorus
    Quote from: Ekim
    There are two sides to every story.  I would like to hear + Williamsons reply.  However, pardon me while I play Devils Advocate, it seems as if Herr Vater Pfluger has reached a braking point with +Williamsons conspiracy theories and has blurted out all his frustration in this letter (imprudently, and disrespectfully).  Perhaps he just lost himself b/c he and the good Bishop have a level of familiarity as one brother would have with another?  Frustration caused him to push due respect aside?    I must admit, I would have to agree, that if His Excellency really did gave a Confirmation sermon declaring the Jєωs responsible for 9-11 tragedy, just hours after the event took place, I'd have to agree that it would be a bit premature as well as inapropriate at such a venue.

    I wish the entire letter could be posted at once but am glad for the nuggets as we recieve them...Than you.


    This was a calculated provocation.  They wanted Bishop Williamson out, they had to build consensus before expelling him.


    Ekim- this letter isn't simply about the disrespect in Fr. Pfluger's writings, or his tone. There is a larger picture here. We are all in agree ment that Fr. Pfluger's frustration caused him to 'push due respect aside'.

    The larger picture points to the fact that Traditionalists today are unwilling to face and confront the world. They seek to conform with it; as did Vatican II. They may not go as far as VII, but they will 'go'. Truth, when compromised an inch, is no longer Truth. You can not go, even part way with our Lord. Either we are 'for him, or against him.' There  is no middle ground. Bishop Williamson, like the Archbishop, is giving up no ground; he doesn't need to, he has the Truth.    



    Offline s2srea

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5106
    • Reputation: +3896/-48
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #8 on: April 12, 2013, 01:13:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ekim
    There are two sides to every story.  I would like to hear + Williamsons reply.  However, pardon me while I play Devils Advocate, it seems as if Herr Vater Pfluger has reached a braking point with +Williamsons conspiracy theories and has blurted out all his frustration in this letter (imprudently, and disrespectfully).  Perhaps he just lost himself b/c he and the good Bishop have a level of familiarity as one brother would have with another?  Frustration caused him to push due respect aside?    I must admit, I would have to agree, that if His Excellency really did gave a Confirmation sermon declaring the Jєωs responsible for 9-11 tragedy, just hours after the event took place, I'd have to agree that it would be a bit premature as well as inapropriate at such a venue.

    I wish the entire letter could be posted at once but am glad for the nuggets as we recieve them...Than you.


    I just want to emphasize "context" here. You seem to be of good will Ekim- giving a priest a benefit of the doubt. Don't forget to also give a bishop the same benefit. And don't forget that there is a larger picture. If you are unfamiliar with the Resistance, why it is occuring, I encourage you to visit the SSPX Agreement forum and read what others have seen. This is only a small part of the painting. To understand we must take a step back and absorb it all.


    Offline John Grace

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5521
    • Reputation: +121/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #9 on: April 12, 2013, 01:32:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    This was a calculated provocation.  They wanted Bishop Williamson out, they had to build consensus before expelling him.


    Of course. Fr Steiner did state the expulsion facilitates an agreement with Rome.

    Offline Mea Culpa

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 200
    • Reputation: +392/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #10 on: April 12, 2013, 01:47:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Telesphorus
    Quote from: Ekim
    There are two sides to every story.  I would like to hear + Williamsons reply.  However, pardon me while I play Devils Advocate, it seems as if Herr Vater Pfluger has reached a braking point with +Williamsons conspiracy theories and has blurted out all his frustration in this letter (imprudently, and disrespectfully).  Perhaps he just lost himself b/c he and the good Bishop have a level of familiarity as one brother would have with another?  Frustration caused him to push due respect aside?    I must admit, I would have to agree, that if His Excellency really did gave a Confirmation sermon declaring the Jєωs responsible for 9-11 tragedy, just hours after the event took place, I'd have to agree that it would be a bit premature as well as inapropriate at such a venue.

    I wish the entire letter could be posted at once but am glad for the nuggets as we recieve them...Than you.


    This was a calculated provocation.  They wanted Bishop Williamson out, they had to build consensus before expelling him.


    Most definitely!!!

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Max Krah also put his stamp of approval on this letter (MK28....or something like that)????

    I don't believe Fr. Pfluger has the guts to take on Bp. Williamson on his own.....he'll need the "popular majority" to back him up. Bp. Williamson is armed with the Truth and has always openly maintained it.



    Offline Quo Vadis Petre

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1234
    • Reputation: +1208/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #11 on: April 12, 2013, 01:49:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "In our time more than ever before, the greatest asset of the evil-disposed is the cowardice and weakness of good men, and all the vigour of Satan's reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics." -St. Pius X

    "If the Church were not divine, this

    Offline Wessex

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1311
    • Reputation: +1953/-361
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #12 on: April 12, 2013, 01:52:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Once ABL had gone, the SSPX became the property of Fr. Schmidberger, Bp. Fellay and Fr. Pfluger. They were going to determine its direction. Bp. W was just in the way.

    Offline Ekim

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 791
    • Reputation: +818/-103
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #13 on: April 12, 2013, 02:14:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thanks s2srea.  I do understand your point and the Resistance.  I am by no means a supporter of Herr Vater Pfluger.  I just believe that there is a time and a place for everything and that IF what Fr. Pfluger says is true, His Excellencies choice of time and place may not have been prudent.  Just as his choice to do the TV interview in Germany, may also be considered by many as imprudent.  

    I don't believe Fr. Pfluger in this letter was saying that Jєωs and Masons do not wield and underlying influence, after all, this was repeatedly stressed by the Archbishop, but rather +Williamsons choice of time and place to speak about these topics isn't always the best.

    Offline Quo Vadis Petre

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1234
    • Reputation: +1208/-6
    • Gender: Male
    Fr. Pflugers letter Part 2
    « Reply #14 on: April 12, 2013, 02:17:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • He wanted +Williamson to retract his opinions on the "h0Ɩ0cαųst", saying they are false! Why all the focus on it?
    "In our time more than ever before, the greatest asset of the evil-disposed is the cowardice and weakness of good men, and all the vigour of Satan's reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics." -St. Pius X

    "If the Church were not divine, this