Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko  (Read 2273 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline brothers keeper

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Reputation: +13/-1
  • Gender: Male
PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
« on: March 02, 2019, 03:16:21 PM »
  • Thanks!9
  • No Thanks!1
  •  
    PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko


    1.  He did not sufficiently speak out about the abominations of Ambrose Moran;  however, he vehemently spoke out against Bishop Williamson in sermons and videos as he taught the seminarians that Bishop Williamson was teaching errors about the new mass, etc.  Did Father Hewko teach the seminarians about the criminal, predatory behavior revealed in the police reports and A. Moran’s many victims, his fraudulent activities and forged documents and pictures, etc.  What did Fr. Hewko do to warn the seminarians about Ambrose Moran?

    2. Why is there such great and deafening silence about the Ambrose Moran situation both now and also from 2015?  This reminds me of the method of operation of the SSPX regarding the 2012 doctrinal preamble.

    3.  In 2015, Father Ortiz researched and wrote a 35 page report on Ambrose Moran.  Were the seminarians taught about this?  Were the Resistance faithful taught about this back in 2015 or 2018 when A.  Moran was being shoved down our throats?  Was Fr. Hewko keeping quiet about this report of Fr. Ortiz, or was he alerting those who needed to know about it in order to help us discern and figure out the A. Moran debacle?  We did not know about this report until just recently in February 2019.  

    4.  Why did Father Hewko not speak out about the horrible conference against Tony LaRosa and those also who questioned A. Moran’s involvement at Boston, KY and his credentials?  Any one who was opposed to Ambrose Moran were bullied and condemned to hell by Fr. Pfeiffer in his public video conference for what was actually proved to be the very concerning revealed truth about the false and fraudulent credentials of this criminal Ambrose Moran .  Where is the public response by Father Hewko to this grave injustice?

    5.  What has Fr. Hewko publically stated regarding the public excommunications of Mr. LaRosa,  Mr. Taylor, and another individual also.  In a telephone conversation, Father Hewko stated that Father Pfeiffer taught the seminarians that the excommunication of Mr. LaRosa was the right thing to be done by Ambrose Moran.  Where is the public condemnation, outrage, and correction by Father Hewko about this?  

    6.  Why does Father Hewko publically state that Ambrose Moran is friendly and likeable?  We all need to break away from this false charity.

    7.  Why does Fr. Hewko publically give Father Pfeiffer the title of Good Father Pfeiffer several times, and say that Fr. Pfeiffer is a great priest just recently in a youtube sermon of February 2019?

    8.  Why does it appear that “The Catacombs” has gone dead about the whole A. Moran debacle, and that they are not allowing any commentary on the A. Moran affair?  Is this according to what Father Hewko wants?

    9.  We believe that Fathers Hewko and Pfeiffer misled us about Bishop Williamson.

    10.  We believe that the reasons for trying to destroy Bishop Williamson in the minds of the faithful could have underlying sinister reasons  including that B. Williamson would not ordain the seminarians of Boston, Kentucky, would not provide holy oils, and would not consecrate Fr. Pfeiffer a Bishop.  Basically Bishop Williamson wanted nothing to do with Father Pfeiffer nor with his seminary for very good reasons.

    11.  The “Pablo Problem” has been going on for many years now.  Many good priests have been driven away because of Pablo, and many faithful have been regularly attacked by Pablo via video , etc. Why did it take so long for Father Hewko to speak out about this “Pablo Problem”?
    In addition, most recently, Father Hewko has been denigrated and disrespected publically by video as have so many others.  Following this, Fr. Hewko finally decided to speak out publically against this.  What did Father Hewko do to stop this “Pablo Problem” of many years before his own victimization took place?

    12.  Father Chazal stated publically in a video that he was present when Bishop Williamson told Father Pfeiffer that he was not competent to run a seminary.

    13.  We believe that Father Pfeiffer lied when he told us that Bishop Williamson hated seminaries.  Father Pfeiffer spoke these words to us at the potluck meal following Holy Mass in 2018.  Fr. Pfeiffer omitted the many true facts regarding Bishop Williamson’s disassociation with Father Pfeiffer as well as Bishop Williamson’s true publically expressed ideas regarding seminaries in the times in which we live today.

    14.  Did the reason that Fr. Pfeiffer and Father Hewko taught us to have nothing to do with Bishop Williamson have anything to do with revenge on the part of Father Pfeiffer, or Father Hewko or either or both of them?  Or was Father Hewko just going along with the plan in sincerity to publically repudiate and strongly convince the faithful to avoid Bishop Williamson? There is so much more to this.  And the condemnation of B. Williamson is so over the top when one compares the tender way and the seemingly false charity with which Father Hewko handled his public comments about the criminal predator Ambrose Moran.  Also, Ambrose Moran has been outed by so many credible people since 2015 with a great deal of truthful research and warnings from concerned priests and others.   What took Father Hewko so long to put an end to his involvement with Ambrose Moran?  Why did Fr. Hewko stand down for so long before he took a public stand himself?  
       
    15.  Why has Father Hewko not publically shown the proper outrage for the many victims of Ambrose Moran?  According to police reports, some of the many victims of Ambrose Moran were vulnerable teenagers.

    16.  Did Father Hewko reach out to the Richards (who are the  parents of two boys) in order to alert them of the predatory activities of Ambrose Moran  who rents a place in Ohio from them  and teaches these boys catechism, etc. as is according to the Mother’s own statement on “The Catacombs”?
    In a telephone conversation with Father Hewko, we personally asked him to alert these parents for obvious reasons.  Did Fr. Hewko do so?  

    17.  The involvement of some priests at Boston, Kentucky such as  Father Poisson, Father Roberts, Father Tetherow, etc. are surrounded in controversy.  The many scandals that have enveloped Boston, Kentucky have been kept under wraps most definitely by Father Hewko as well as others there.  Can we trust Father Hewko going forward?  

    18.  “Poor” Father Poisson was conditionally reordained by Ambrose Moran in July 2018.  According to Father Hewko’s statement in a sermon in February 2019, the bizarre way Fr. Hewko originally came to know about this is paraphrased as follows:  The seminarians were packing and so Fr. Hewko asked them where they were going.  Father was then told that they were going to Ohio where (Poor) Father Poisson was going to be reordained by Ambrose Moran.  As Father Hewko was concerned about this and thought that the faithful were being deceived by not being told of this, Father Hewko, who was going on Pilgrimage in August, only finally spoke to Father Pfeiffer in September of 2018.  This begs the question as to why it took Fr. Hewko so long to make his concerns known to Fr. Pfeiffer.  It is well known that both Fr. Hewko and Fr. Pfeiffer have always been readily available to all by phone?  Again why did Father Hewko take so long to address this with Fr. Pfeiffer?  

    19.  We are wondering why Father Hewko decided to stop the you tube recording prior to when the question and answer session began, and  which followed his statement of further explanation concerning that which caused his separation from  Boston, Kentucky. Did Father Hewko want to shy away from tough questions that could be difficult and therefore be possible problems for him to answer?   Shutting down the   flow of information to the faithful, has too often been the way used in order to hide the reality and the wrongdoing.  Maybe, Bishop Williamson was resolved enough to tackle the tough questions and simply speak the truth as honestly as he possibly could without hiding it or disguising it.
               
    20.  The Ambrose Moran situation regarding Father Pfeiffer is very disturbing to say the least, and as yet, Father Hewko has not addressed the great deal of wrongdoing on the part of Fr. Pfeiffer. Has Fr. Hewko rebuked Father Pfeiffer as God taught the way this must be done in the Scriptures as when Saint Paul rebuked Saint Peter?  Also, and more recently, the excellent example of truthful and public correction for the good of the faithful and the edification of the Catholic Faith, the saintly Archbishop LeFebvre did his priestly duty well and objectively without fail, fully in every way, and with great courage.  Father Hewko states often that he follows in the line of Archbishop Lefebvre, and we now question why Fr. Hewko’s words do not line up with his actions.  Is there the obstacle of human respect for Fr. Pfeiffer that is motivating Fr. Hewko to neglect his priestly duty and responsibility to guide and lead the sheep?   The sheep have been seriously battered, bullied, mistreated, and deceived by Father Pfeiffer and Ambrose Moran.  It is a dereliction of duty for Father Hewko to continue to stand down.

    21.  Another consideration is the most interesting public response from Father Hewko toward the accusations from Ambrose Moran that both Fathers Hewko and Pfeiffer are not valid priests.  A. Moran dredges up the false argument that because Archbishop Lefebvre was consecrated by Cardinal Lienart who was a Freemason, the ability to validly ordain priests and validly consecrate bishops was lacking firstly in Cardinal Lienart and therefore also lacking in Archbishop Lefebvre.  So it goes that the priesthoods of Fathers Hewko and Pfeiffer are also not valid.  Back to the interesting public response of Father Hewko on this subject.  For the first time so it seems, Father Hewko names and speaks of Ambrose Moran while not using the title Bishop or Archbishop before his name.  In addition, Fr. Hewko refutes the accusation of Ambrose Moran with the solid truth that even though Cardinal Lienart was a Freemason, he was conferring the holy orders as a valid priest, with valid intention, valid form, and valid matter.  Therefore, Archbishop Lefebvre is valid and as is Father Hewko, Father Pfeiffer and all the others who received valid sacraments down the line from Archbishop Lefebvre.  Another very important point that needs to be made is the failure of Father Hewko to apply this same application of valid priest, valid form, valid matter, and valid intention to the argument from Bishop Williamson that the novus ordo priests and mass are under the same practical applications of validity and therefore the Sacraments of the novus ordo priests and novus ordo mass can likewise be valid if the priest is valid, the form is valid, the matter is valid, and the intention is valid.  If there is validity then there will also be Grace.  Is this position of Father Hewko  hypocrisy in that it is right and true for him, but false for others? Father Hewko has lavishly condemned Bishop Williamson for holding what amounts to the same position that Fr. Hewko holds for his own validity.  As we are able to understand this matter of validity, it follows that public reparations  equal to the vehement and many  public condemnations of Bishop Williamson by Fathers Hewko and Pfeiffer are necessary.  We have been misled by the false accusations of Fathers Hewko and Pfeiffer which caused us believe their false condemnations of Bishop Williamson and also to avoid him like the plague.

    22.  As we have been manipulated by Fathers Pfeiffer and  Hewko to think of and label Bishop Williamson and his flock of faithful sheep as the “fake and false Resistance”, the damage has been great to the Catholic Resistance at large.  The terms “fake and false Resistance” were devised in order to control the faithful in a propaganda campaign against the Bishop Williamson enemies of the so called “true Resistance”.   We have been deceived and divided by what can be argued as a personal battle between the leaders of Boston, Kentucky and their adherents with those who follow Bishop Williamson as their leader.   This has been devastating to the Resistance fight for the Catholic Faith. When will Father Hewko do the right thing, and repair the damage that he has caused?

    23.  To the best of our ability, we consider the above as pertinent.

    24.  We Pray for the Triumph of Our Mother’s Immaculate Heart.

    Offline St Paul

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 151
    • Reputation: +143/-53
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #1 on: March 03, 2019, 07:00:24 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • Excellent.
    (You need to add Fr. Cordaro to the list with Fr. Roberts, et al.)

    I would venture to say fr. Hewko is awakening from a spell, so to speak, and learning all the things he did which he should not have done and vice versa.  

    Rather than go on circuit, it would behoove him to take the bull by the horns and face the situation.  

    In light of that, do you remember when you awoke to the spell of Fr. Pfeiffer and Mr. Paul Hernandez?

    Give Fr. Hewko a break and let him recover from the cult he has been in for seven years.  I have little doubt he will, eventually, do what he needs to do.  

    In the meantime, pray for Fr. Hewko.


    Offline confusedcatholic

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 12
    • Reputation: +24/-0
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #2 on: March 03, 2019, 08:51:40 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  •  :applause:The problems and questions mentioned by brothers keeper do need to be addressed by Fr Hewko.
            It is a shame that Fr Hewko feels compelled to go on circuit so soon after leaving Pfeifferville.
            Apparently, he doesn't realize he was in a cult and needs time to reeducate (IMHO).
            Regarding "following in the line of Archbishop Lefebvre", I distinctly remember Fr Hewko teaching us back in the mid-90's when he was a young priest on circuit every weekend in Eddystone, PA (Philly area) that it was Archbishop Lefebvre's position that the Novus Ordo Mass can be valid if the priest is valid, form is valid, matter is valid, and intention is valid, but that the Novus Ordo Mass is dangerous to the Faith. Now Fr Hewko teaches that the Novus Ordo Mass is the abomination of desolation and can never give Grace. So, is Fr Hewko still following in the line of Archbishop Lefebvre as he claims?

    Offline hollingsworth

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2335
    • Reputation: +2550/-282
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #3 on: March 03, 2019, 10:05:19 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!4
  • Apprarently, "brothers keeper" feels that it is his responsibility to be his brother's keeper online.  I disagree with this notion.  Better that he try to be Fr. Hewko's keeper offline.

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 22783
    • Reputation: +19961/-224
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #4 on: March 03, 2019, 11:12:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  •         Regarding "following in the line of Archbishop Lefebvre", I distinctly remember Fr Hewko teaching us back in the mid-90's when he was a young priest on circuit every weekend in Eddystone, PA (Philly area) that it was Archbishop Lefebvre's position that the Novus Ordo Mass can be valid if the priest is valid, form is valid, matter is valid, and intention is valid, but that the Novus Ordo Mass is dangerous to the Faith. Now Fr Hewko teaches that the Novus Ordo Mass is the abomination of desolation and can never give Grace. So, is Fr Hewko still following in the line of Archbishop Lefebvre as he claims?

    Exactly.

    +ABL isn't whatever you want him to be -- he had a distinct position, which was the Catholic one. People followed him and made the SSPX the largest Trad group by a large margin because he was so prudent and sane in his Catholic thinking.

    SSPX supporters didn't follow +ABL and then years later say "Whew! Good thing he had a prudent, sane, true, Catholic position! I might have ended up in error otherwise!"

    No, they followed him in the first place BECAUSE his position resonated with them as the Catholic truth.

    I also don't believe the argument that the SSPX was big because the broad path is always more busy. What if Fr. Pfeiffer's cult were marginalized and down to 70 totally brainwashed people worldwide (it might be, actually!) But the mainstream Resistance had say 1000 people. Would that mean Fr. Pfeiffer's cult is the narrow path and the main Resistance is the broad path? Of course not!

    Being popular doesn't necessarily mean it's the truth, but it doesn't mean it's error or bad either! I bet a lot more people use the toilet rather than the living room rug. Does that mean the toilet users are dumb sheeple? No, it's just that in this one area, the will of the people aligns with the truth and the best way.

    And when you factor in that this great mass of people in the largest group (SSPX) each had *plenty* of sacrifices to make -- the road was hardly "easy" by any objective measure -- I'd say the collective vote of thousands of serious, devout, educated Catholics means something.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!


    Offline brothers keeper

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 6
    • Reputation: +13/-1
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #5 on: March 03, 2019, 12:29:02 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • First off, we just wanted to state that stpaul and confusedcatholic offered some excellent analysis.  Thank you for that light you shared.

    Secondly,  in our recently desired path toward re-education regarding the truth of His Excellency Bishop Williamson’s analysis of many things Catholic, one of his statements jumped out and here we paraphrase:  Thomas Jefferson had the false belief that if you just put truth in the public square, it will do its own work.  Again, Bishop Williamson rightly and importantly states that this is false.  Let us live by this great Truth which has been revealed throughout the Holy Scriptures and by our Lord Jesus from a Prince of His Church, Bishop Williamson.  It is a very important lesson today.  There most certainly is a time needed for Father Hewko to adjust to his new circumstances, and of course God tells us that there is a season for everything.  

    Next, we must also work in order to facilitate Father Hewko’ s path to freedom from error, and we need to pray and also perhaps to do more work still.  As Saint Augustine tells us:  “Pray as though everything depended on God.  Work as though everything depended on you.”  

    Having said that, we obviously realize that this is a critical time in the spiritual battle for our Catholic Faith and on behalf of our Father Hewko’s holy priestly edification.  The evil one is tirelessly at work in order to do whatever is possible to keep Father on the wrong path.  
    However, have no doubt that God and our beautiful Blessed Mother will reveal to each one of her soldiers what Jesus wills for each one of us to do.

    The sermon of Father Hewko regarding the new mass as “The Abomination of Desolation” could possibly indicate that Father Hewko is going further away from the truth on this, further away from Archbishop Lefebvre and his teaching as confusedcatholic stated well, further away from opening his mind toward re-evaluating Bishop Williamson and the truth of what His Excellency ACTUALLY taught on this subject, and seemingly moving toward hunkering down more still in this wayward direction.
    Indeed, we have come to realize that Father Hewko is often and lately focusing, in some part or other of his sermons, this subject of the new mass.  For those with eyes to see and ears to hear, this means a great deal is going on in the battle we are all in.  

    The subtle cunning of the devil should never be underestimated, and we must realize that this is what we are dealing with at this point.  Again, make no mistake that this is a critical time for Father Hewko and for those of the Church Militant.   God is in charge, no doubt, and as always, He desires that we be His instruments.

    Our Prayer :  Praise, Honor, Glory, and Thanks to Jesus and His and our Immaculate Mother who will lead us every step, moment, and breath to do God’s Will.  Lead us to be your instruments in this battle for the True Catholic Faith and for our Father Hewko’s priestly restoration from his time at Boston, Kentucky,  which You have already begun to unfold before us according to Your Perfect Wisdom and Your Merciful Plan for us all.    AMEN.  

    Offline Ekim

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 587
    • Reputation: +714/-55
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #6 on: March 03, 2019, 05:51:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Hey Confusedcatholic, I was in Eddystone in the mid 90’s and also remember the young Fr. Hewko teaching this.

    Brothers Keeper...we should especially pray that Fr. Hewko humbly submits himself to a Resistance Bishop.  This would certainly help put him back and keep him on track.

    Offline Seraphina

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 423
    • Reputation: +369/-75
    • Gender: Female
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #7 on: March 03, 2019, 08:29:50 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'll get lots of down thumbs on this comment, but on-going splits among brethren are the main (and rotten) fruit of Protestantism.  Archbishop Lefebvre did not teach that the Novus ordo is the abomination of desolation as spoken of by Daniel the prophet.  With all due respect, does Fr. Hewko know better?  

    Let's look to the Church, what She teaches and has always and everywhere taught instead of looking to one priest or another.

    And pray that Fr. Hewko does come to realize he was not only in a cult, but played a part in the formation of that cult, if not by intention, then by omission.  I do not believe either Fr. Pfeiffer or Hewko set out to form a cult, but by virtue of making themselves accountable to no one, what happened (and continues to happen) was entirely predictable. 


    Offline St Paul

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 151
    • Reputation: +143/-53
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #8 on: March 03, 2019, 08:54:44 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  •  I do not believe either Fr. Pfeiffer or Hewko set out to form a cult, but by virtue of making themselves accountable to no one, what happened (and continues to happen) was entirely predictable.
    This is exactly why The Church requires all priests to have a bishop superior.  
    Fr. Pfeiffer will continue down the path of destruction and degradation simply because he does not submit himself to the Church rules.  Let us pray Fr. Hewko does not follow.

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 22783
    • Reputation: +19961/-224
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #9 on: March 04, 2019, 08:11:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • I'll get lots of down thumbs on this comment, but on-going splits among brethren are the main (and rotten) fruit of Protestantism.  Archbishop Lefebvre did not teach that the Novus ordo is the abomination of desolation as spoken of by Daniel the prophet.  With all due respect, does Fr. Hewko know better?  

    The question is, WHY will you get a lot of down thumbs for this comment?
    A) we're a bunch of jerks here on CI
    B) you deserve it (for this particular comment)

    I'm leaning towards B.

    Did you read my recent posts about WHO IS TO BLAME?

    Are you going to criticize +ABL for the "split" that happened after Vatican II? How many times do I have to say it -- when a Catholic stays put, avoids novel doctrines/heresy, he is not the SLIGHTEST BIT to blame for general chaos, confusion and SPLITS caused by OTHERS embracing novel doctrines, practices, and heresies.

    Just like a LAW ABIDING man shouldn't suffer the slightest blame or scrutiny for being attacked on the street -- even if, to some uninformed bystanders, it appears that "2 men are fighting". Who was just trying to go on about his business, and who was it that started a fight? A man in a fight for his life will have to defend himself, of course -- even if it looks like 2 scrappy men are fighting.

    How would you like it if you, a peace loving person, were walking along minding your own business and a man jumped out and attacked you with a knife? Say you could defend yourself to some degree. How would you feel if people clicked their tongues at BOTH of you equally, saying, "Oh, some people I tell ya...why do they have to resort to violence...*tsk tsk*"

    Or how the Innocent Spouse analogy -- your spouse runs off on you to commit adultery. You obviously need to file for a civil divorce, for financial/legal reasons. Or even if you didn't do that -- you'd still be "involved in a split/separation/divorce" to most people. You'd be "separated, divorced" or damaged goods in the eyes of many people -- even if the fault was 0% yours. They wouldn't hold you in the same esteem as a married couple with X kids. But why? It wasn't your fault at all.

    "Judge not according to appearances, but judge just judgment."
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17129
    • Reputation: +9518/-4101
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #10 on: March 04, 2019, 09:34:05 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • +ABL isn't whatever you want him to be -- he had a distinct position, which was the Catholic one.

    Well, the only issue that sometimes arises in this regard is that +ABL went back and forth with regard to his tone over the years, more or less conciliatory towards Rome, depending on the political climate.  Sometimes he sounded like a sedevacantist, at other times like the neo-SSPX.  That's why every group, from sedevacantists to Resistance to neo-SSPX can all produce quotes and engage in Lefebvre vs. Lefebvre dialectics.  So you have the 1977 +ABL (Paul VI) vs. the 1979 +ABL (after election of JP2) vs. the 1986 +ABL (right after Assisi) vs. the 1988 +ABL (episcopal consecrations).  So to say that he had a single distinct position is a bit of a stretch.  Not that I fault him for changing his mind from time to time ... as most of us have done that to one degree or another.  We're all just trying to find our way through this crisis in this eclipse of the Church.


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 22783
    • Reputation: +19961/-224
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #11 on: March 04, 2019, 09:47:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Maybe position is the wrong word.

    He had a constant, distinctly Catholic, prudent approach to the confusing, changing situation on the ground. He was trying to get through the Crisis just like any of us. But something about his approach, his attitude, attracted a LARGE number of Catholics of good will. Apparently his approach (and latest position AT ANY GIVEN TIME, IN REACTION TO THE CHANGING SITUATION) was Catholic, attractive, and rang true with a great number of souls also trying to preserve their Catholic Faith during the Crisis.

    If you are stable, it doesn't mean you won't change -- because what if the situation or world around you changes? What CAN be stable is your Catholic principles and bearing, to be applied to any situation that's thrown at you.

    Always turning the steering wheel right or left* isn't the point -- the point is always turning the wheel the CORRECT WAY AT THE TIME to give the passengers the greatest chance of preserving life and limb. Yes, his steering wheel is pointing this direction this minute, and a different direction another minute. But all the time, he is making the most prudent course based on the current status of the road (number and position of cars around him, current weather, etc.)

    Or maybe a better analogy -- a driver has to make countless minute movements of the steering wheel (to the left or right) in order to continue going forward PERFECTLY STRAIGHT, due to slight dips and imperfections in the road, wind, bulges in the road, etc.

    Course corrections based on changing information or a changing situation are always legitimate.

    The example I often give -- I used to be SSPX, then I supported Fr. Pfeiffer. Today I do neither. Am I the least bit unstable? Not at all. In fact, I've stayed in the same exact spot. It's the SSPX that decided to go on a Quixotic errand and head back to Modern Rome. Fr. Pfeiffer continued the SSPX original position for a while, then he went off the deep end. I had to make corrections or changes just to keep a sane, Catholic position.

    * in this analogy, left and right don't mean anything special, like the usual liberal and conservative.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4440
    • Reputation: +5370/-314
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #12 on: March 04, 2019, 12:06:13 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, the only issue that sometimes arises in this regard is that +ABL went back and forth with regard to his tone over the years, more or less conciliatory towards Rome, depending on the political climate.  Sometimes he sounded like a sedevacantist, at other times like the neo-SSPX.  That's why every group, from sedevacantists to Resistance to neo-SSPX can all produce quotes and engage in Lefebvre vs. Lefebvre dialectics.  So you have the 1977 +ABL (Paul VI) vs. the 1979 +ABL (after election of JP2) vs. the 1986 +ABL (right after Assisi) vs. the 1988 +ABL (episcopal consecrations).  So to say that he had a single distinct position is a bit of a stretch.  Not that I fault him for changing his mind from time to time ... as most of us have done that to one degree or another.  We're all just trying to find our way through this crisis in this eclipse of the Church.

    Yeah, some people have misused +ABL all right.

    IMHO, +ABL is not a Saint.
    And I don't agree with him on his theology about the Novus ordo missae or (4) Baptisms.

    He was an important Roman Catholic cleric, a pious leader in an era of the impious.
    I believe he had good intentions, but he had human frailties too.

    Eternal rest grant unto him Oh Lord.  :pray:
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 22783
    • Reputation: +19961/-224
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #13 on: March 04, 2019, 12:45:00 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yeah, some people have misused +ABL all right.

    IMHO, +ABL is not a Saint.
    And I don't agree with him on his theology about the Novus ordo missae or (4) Baptisms.

    He was an important Roman Catholic cleric, a pious leader in an era of the impious.
    I believe he had good intentions, but he had human frailties too.

    Eternal rest grant unto him Oh Lord.  :pray:


    1. I don't know what you're talking about (re: "4 baptisms")

    2. "His" theology regarding the NOM is the only one that fits all the requirements, and makes the most sense. I'm not going to get into a sedevacantist debate here to derail the thread, but let's just say +ABL's "recognize and resist" position holds its own against all other theories on the Crisis, ESPECIALLY sedevacantism.

    3. Yes, he was a frail human being -- like all the other saints canonized by the Church. Except for our Blessed Mother, all the saints had Original Sin and fought against personal sin as well.

    4. I disagree with you because I think +ABL did go straight to heaven, and someday when the Church is restored he will be one of the first men of heroic virtue during this Crisis to be canonized.

    5. You have to cut him some slack though -- he didn't have access to the great wisdom of the armchair lay theologian "Incredulous" who pits his own opinions and theology against those of the prelate chosen by the Pope to represent all of French-speaking Africa, the prelate chosen to help compose schemata (documents, basically a to-do list and outline) for Vatican II, etc.

    +ABL had great education and experience, dealt with several Popes -- but alas, he didn't have Incredulous to help him with his theology. What a shame.

    6. Marcel Lefebvre, ora pro nobis.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 17129
    • Reputation: +9518/-4101
    • Gender: Male
    Re: PROBLEMS, QUESTIONS, AND CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING Fr. Hewko
    « Reply #14 on: March 04, 2019, 04:58:09 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • I disagree with him also on a number of issues, but I do believe he's a saint and will one day be canonized.  Do I believe he went straight to heaven?  I have no idea.  But that is not a prerequisite to sanctity and canonization.  Even the saints may have ended their lives with a few things to atone for here or there.

    Saint is not synonymous with infallibility; there are quite a few Church Fathers and Doctors who held positions that were erroneous and even heretical, but they were clearly only material adherents of these errors, and I have no doubt that +Lefebvre did not formally embrace any errors contrary to the faith.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16