I am curious as to why this is being bumped? Is there more to add to what has already been said previously?

Then you surely have not forgotten that we are all ashes and to ashes we shall all return.

You have taken a grave responsibility on your shoulders by posting such a long laundry list of serious accusations. I hope for your own sake that you have sufficient proof of each one of them.

If proven true though, you may want to set your brain to work on the following question : If Frs Hewko/Pfeiffer are really under the influence of this devil incarnate, where is that showing in their teachings, or if not, why not ? I am having a hard time understanding how someone who is under a spell by the devil can still preach what seems to me like excellent sermons.

I think this argument tends to exonerate me.

Exactly -- look at Fr. Pfeiffer's sermons. He slams fellow Traditional, Resistant priests by name, tells people to stay at home rather than go to Mass and receive Our Blessed Lord in Holy Communion, because the only priest available is Fr. Zendejas, Fr. Voigt, or another "enemy" of Fr. Pfeiffer.

He is thrilled to point his faithful followers to Fr. Tetherow, a convicted pedophile, because he knows they won't be going to Fr. Zendejas now.

And Fr. Pfeiffer opposes all the Resistant bishops God has sent us, because none of them like his decrepit seminary, or will associate with his group (with Pablo at the helm, and attacks on Resistant priests being the order of the day).

He has also slandered Fr. Voigt, as well as Fr. Zendejas, +Williamson, +Faure, and others. And he hasn't apologized for any of it.

Yes, by their fruits I judge them.

Fr. Pfeiffer has become very activist, ignoring the spiritual life, and his sermons have become bitter, angry, and sterile. Fr. Voigt testifies that Fr. Pfeiffer doesn't pray much anymore.

Don't ever forget: a person's rhetoric, oratorial skills, and intelligence are not instantly lost if they went into a state of mortal sin. Those natural virtues would still be with them: just look at the Jews! They are highly intelligent people. They could preach a mean sermon, especially with their people skills.

But it would be sterile. It wouldn't have the sweet unction of Christ, because it wouldn't be the fruits of prayer and meditation.

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: ManuelChavez

I am curious as to why this is being bumped? Is there more to add to what has already been said previously?

Someone contacted me and wanted this information about Pablo. I figured once I found it, I should bump it in case anyone else is looking for it.

 pieces of this thread are not true. Caution is advised when reading the thread.

You mean like when you accused Matthew of slander for claiming that Pablo says to practice Omerta and then he threw the link at you silencing you? You that part was pretty untrue that you wrote. Got it...

Quote from: Centroamerica

Quote from: ManuelChavez

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: ManuelChavez

I am curious as to why this is being bumped? Is there more to add to what has already been said previously?

Someone contacted me and wanted this information about Pablo. I figured once I found it, I should bump it in case anyone else is looking for it.

 pieces of this thread are not true. Caution is advised when reading the thread.

You mean like when you accused Matthew of slander for claiming that Pablo says to practice Omerta and then he threw the link at you silencing you? You that part was pretty untrue that you wrote. Got it...

Libel, not slander. Slander is spoken, libel is written. People make mistakes. I don't recall accusing Matthew of libel, though, on this one issue.

This is from my old post...

From Matthew... He has told us personally that he practices Omerta, which is normally associated with the Mafia.  

My response: I will not deal with hearsay or rumors, and neither should anyone else.

That is what I said about that. I stand corrected, but I didn't accuse Matthew of libel or slander.

Manuel, you can't make generic "poison the well" statements. If there's something inaccurate, please address it specifically.

The original post has been modified and updated, and several response posts have been deleted.

I needed to make it clear that biases and incomplete information can distort the truth of any situation, and that it is best to seek verification of any presented information.

Pablo was accused of animal sacrifices, for one, in at least a few posts on this site. That is mainly inaccurate. While a dog was burned, it was not a sacrifice, nor was Pablo involved in that decision.

I did not seek to poison the well, but just to caution against forming a judgement against the seminary or Pablo based solely on the writing in this thread.

Take my post like the food warning labels. The food may be fine, but it is always best to take care.

This thread may contain trace amounts of Peanuts...