Author Topic: Scandalous Fr. Pfluger Conferences: (Read 9895 times)

John Grace · « **Reply #45 on:** January 29, 2014, 02:39:12 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote
And, just as we are compelled to give the benefit of the doubt to Fr. Pfluger, we must also give it to the Brother who took the notes. My guess is, these notes at least accurately convey the impression he took away from Fr. Pfluger's conference. Unless these notes are from a malicious liar, who made them up completely to portray Fr. Pfluger as more liberal than he is, in which case I expect a response to Sean's request. To me, though, certain points echo his letter to +BW a few years back, and comments of Fr. Pfluger elsewhere. Often fuzziness, both in electronic and human translations, is due to the fuzziness in the ideas. [If the alleged note-taker/source of these notes is a malicious liar, he did a good job making it fuzzy enough to be credible.]

A few very important points.

1. We should give the benefit of the doubt to the brother who took the notes too. What, is the benefit of the doubt only for the pro-Fellay faction?

2. If these notes were distored by malice, they are a masterpiece of diabolical intelligence because they are so believable: they convey Fr. Pfluger's usual mode of modernist-like fuzzy speech -- they sound like they come from Fr. Pfluger.

3. (The most important point): If these notes are IN ANY WAY INACCURATE or distorting the true message of Fr. Pfluger's conference, he would certainly respond to Sean's request for a clarification. Furthermore, he would go out of his way to use the media at his disposal to decry this horrible injustice that has been done to him (distorting his message).

But instead, if these notes are accurate, Fr. P is not going to say anything. It's better for these things to slip under the radar, and NOT confirm things like this. That way, even if we have notes from the conference, everyone will write it off as "hearsay" and "internet rumor" until it's too late.

He gets his conference, he influences his audience, but we don't get anything to wave around at people as we resist this march towards Modernism. Win-win for Fr. Pfluger.

Apart from those known to support Bishop Williamson, my understanding is Fr Pfluger was greeted warmly in Ireland. This was despite the revelations of William of Norwich.

The majority will never see this new material regarding Fr Pfluger.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #46 on:** January 29, 2014, 02:39:41 PM »

Ekim:

Quote

There is a lack of charity in Traditional circles that must be addressed

.

Of course there is a lack of charity. We've all seen it, and some of us have undoubtedly been responsible for lapses in charity. But that lack of charity does not mean that traditionalists should bow to regularization with Rome. It does not mean that Rome is not totally off the track doctrinally and ideologically. Phluger is not authorized or justified, by the lack of charity exhibited by some traditionalists, to suggest that we return to the post-conciliar big tent. There is a total disconnect, IMO, in Pfluger's reasoning.

John Grace · « **Reply #47 on:** January 29, 2014, 02:43:46 PM »

Quote

(The most important point): If these notes are IN ANY WAY INACCURATE or distorting the true message of Fr. Pfluger's conference, he would certainly respond to Sean's request for a clarification. Furthermore, he would go out of his way to use the media at his disposal to decry this horrible injustice that has been done to him (distorting his message).

I phoned Menzingen two years ago seeking "clarification".

John Grace · « **Reply #48 on:** January 29, 2014, 02:48:30 PM »

Fr Hewko highlighted what Bishop Fellay said in 1991. He spoke favourably of Vatican II. That is 23 years ago. Why the shocked faces and gasps at 'Voices in the Wilderness' conference in June 2013? It's very strange. Has it taken 23 years to realise Bishop Fellay is a liberal? Priests were critical of him in the 1980s. They are certainly vindicated.

Archbishop Lefebvre was leaned on and Bishop Fellay was added. This has been discussed before. Fr N Pfluger has always been a bad egg also.

John Grace · « **Reply #49 on:** January 29, 2014, 02:56:39 PM »

Quote

That way, even if we have notes from the conference, everyone will write it off as "hearsay" and "internet rumor" until it's too late.

It will be dismissed as 'internet rumour' for certain. Laity and priests should have been vocal years ago.